Model comparison
Gemma 2B vs GPT-5.6 Luna
GPT-5.6 Luna is the stronger model overall, scoring 54.7 to 29.1 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 12 shared benchmarks.
GoogleSummary
- They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 2B scores higher in 0 categories and GPT-5.6 Luna in 7 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where GPT-5.6 Luna leads 77.5 to 27.6.
- Gemma 2B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Gemma 2B | GPT-5.6 Luna | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenAI | |
| Noometry Index | 29.1 | 54.7 |
| Released | 2024-02-21 | 2026-07-09 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | — | 1.05M |
| Max output | — | 128K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.20 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $1.20 |
| Results tracked | 23 | 51 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding GPT-5.6 Luna leads
Gemma 2B: 28.9 (#300), GPT-5.6 Luna: 53.9 (#25)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | GPT-5.6 Luna |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1010 | 1466 |
| DeepSWE | — | 67.2% |
| FrontierCode | — | 39.8% |
| CursorBench | — | 35.9% |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1517 |
| SciCode | — | 53.6% |
| WeirdML | — | 60.9% |
| ALE-Bench | — | 1,667 |
| HumanEval+ | 20.7% | — |
| MBPP+ | 34.1% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Gemma 2B: —, GPT-5.6 Luna: 35.3 (#37)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | GPT-5.6 Luna |
|---|---|---|
| BALROG | — | 45.6% |
| GDP.pdf | — | 22.7% |
| Vending-Bench 2 | — | 4,095 |
Reasoning GPT-5.6 Luna leads
Gemma 2B: 17.9 (#275), GPT-5.6 Luna: 47.5 (#38)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | GPT-5.6 Luna |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 989 | 1452 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 93.57 | 156.32 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | — | 59.5% |
| SimpleBench | — | 46.8% |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 49.1% |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 69.4% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | — | 88% |
| CritPt | — | 20.6% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 40% |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 21% |
| DTBench | — | 89.1% |
| LMCA | — | 48.5% |
| Surface Evolver Bench | — | 61.9% |
| BIG-Bench Hard | 35.2% | — |
| HellaSwag | 71.4% | — |
| PIQA | 77.3% | — |
| WinoGrande | 65.4% | — |
Math GPT-5.6 Luna leads
Gemma 2B: 27.6 (#237), GPT-5.6 Luna: 77.5 (#12)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | GPT-5.6 Luna |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1009 | 1455 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 82.1% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | — | 61% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 98.3% |
| ProofBench | — | 60% |
| GSM8K | 17.7% | — |
Knowledge Not comparable
Gemma 2B: —, GPT-5.6 Luna: 58.6 (#31)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | GPT-5.6 Luna |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 91.6% |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 41% |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1479 |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | 42.1% | — |
| BoolQ | 69.4% | — |
| MMLU | 42.3% | — |
| TriviaQA | 53.2% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Gemma 2B: —, GPT-5.6 Luna: 43.0 (#22)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | GPT-5.6 Luna |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1259 |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | — | 22.6% |
| Furniture Assembly | — | 42.5% |
| LMArena Document | — | 1457 |
Multilingual GPT-5.6 Luna leads
Gemma 2B: 23.1 (#289), GPT-5.6 Luna: 53.0 (#73)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | GPT-5.6 Luna |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 958 | 1418 |
| LMArena Chinese | 986 | 1469 |
| LMArena Russian | 937 | 1428 |
| LMArena French | — | 1457 |
| LMArena German | — | 1459 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1416 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1414 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1445 |
Instruction Following GPT-5.6 Luna leads
Gemma 2B: 48.8 (#297), GPT-5.6 Luna: 76.0 (#48)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | GPT-5.6 Luna |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 971 | 1440 |
Long Context GPT-5.6 Luna leads
Gemma 2B: 29.9 (#286), GPT-5.6 Luna: 43.9 (#78)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | GPT-5.6 Luna |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 981 | 1437 |
Writing & Preference GPT-5.6 Luna leads
Gemma 2B: 24.1 (#303), GPT-5.6 Luna: 68.3 (#27)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | GPT-5.6 Luna |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1002 | 1432 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 986 | 1397 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 945 | 1433 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 1829 |
| EQ-Bench 4 | — | 1156 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemma 2B better than GPT-5.6 Luna?
GPT-5.6 Luna is the stronger model overall, scoring 54.7 to 29.1 on the Noometry Index.
Is Gemma 2B or GPT-5.6 Luna better for coding?
GPT-5.6 Luna scores higher on coding benchmarks: 53.9 versus 28.9 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Gemma 2B and GPT-5.6 Luna share?
12 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 2B has 23 scored results on Noometry and GPT-5.6 Luna has 51.