Model comparison
Gemma 2B vs Qwen2.5 7B Instruct
Gemma 2B and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct score almost the same on the Noometry Index (29.6 vs 29.0), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Last verified . 2 shared benchmarks.
Google
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 2 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 2B scores higher in 2 categories and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct in 3 categories; 5 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Qwen2.5 7B Instruct leads 48.8 to 24.0.
Side by side
| Gemma 2B | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | |
| Noometry Index | 29.6 | 29.0 |
| Released | 2024-02-21 | 2024-09 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | — | 131K |
| Max output | — | 8K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.17 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $0.70 |
| Results tracked | 23 | 15 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Qwen2.5 7B Instruct leads
Gemma 2B: 29.4 (#305), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 36.5 (#208)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 37.6% |
| LMArena Coding | 1010 | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 46.1% |
| HumanEval+ | 20.7% | — |
| MBPP+ | 34.1% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Gemma 2B: —, Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 23.8 (#124)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| BALROG | — | 7.8% |
Reasoning Gemma 2B leads
Gemma 2B: 18.8 (#275), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 14.8 (#322)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 94.2 | 118.51 |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 0% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 989 | — |
| DTBench | — | 47.7% |
| LMCA | — | 6.4% |
| BIG-Bench Hard | 35.2% | — |
| HellaSwag | 71.4% | — |
| PIQA | 77.3% | — |
| WinoGrande | 65.4% | — |
Math Gemma 2B leads
Gemma 2B: 30.0 (#239), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 12.6 (#306)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 2.5% |
| Omni-MATH | — | 29.4% |
| LMArena Math | 1009 | — |
| GSM8K | 17.7% | — |
Knowledge Not comparable
Gemma 2B: —, Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 17.0 (#286)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| MMLU | 42.3% | 72.9% |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 35.5% |
| MMLU-Pro | — | 53.9% |
| GPQA (HELM) | — | 34.1% |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | 42.1% | — |
| BoolQ | 69.4% | — |
| TriviaQA | 53.2% | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
Gemma 2B: 23.0 (#294), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 958 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 986 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 937 | — |
Instruction Following Qwen2.5 7B Instruct leads
Gemma 2B: 48.5 (#302), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 63.2 (#231)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| IFEval | — | 74.1% |
| LMArena Instruction Following | 970 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
Gemma 2B: 29.9 (#291), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 981 | — |
Writing & Preference Qwen2.5 7B Instruct leads
Gemma 2B: 24.0 (#308), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 48.8 (#195)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1002 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 987 | — |
| WildBench | — | 73.1% |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 945 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemma 2B better than Qwen2.5 7B Instruct?
Gemma 2B and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct score almost the same on the Noometry Index (29.6 vs 29.0), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Is Gemma 2B or Qwen2.5 7B Instruct better for coding?
Qwen2.5 7B Instruct scores higher on coding benchmarks: 36.5 versus 29.4 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Gemma 2B and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct share?
2 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 2B has 23 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct has 15.