Model comparison
Gemma 2B vs Qwen3 235B-A22B
Qwen3 235B-A22B is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.5 to 29.6 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 12 shared benchmarks.
Google
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 2B scores higher in 1 category and Qwen3 235B-A22B in 6 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Qwen3 235B-A22B leads 59.6 to 24.0.
Side by side
| Gemma 2B | Qwen3 235B-A22B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | |
| Noometry Index | 29.6 | 43.5 |
| Released | 2024-02-21 | 2025-04 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | — | 131K |
| Max output | — | 16K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.70 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $2.80 |
| Results tracked | 23 | 49 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Qwen3 235B-A22B leads
Gemma 2B: 29.4 (#305), Qwen3 235B-A22B: 44.3 (#75)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | Qwen3 235B-A22B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1010 | 1445 |
| Aider Polyglot | — | 59.6% |
| SciCode | — | 42.4% |
| WeirdML | — | 41% |
| HumanEval+ | 20.7% | — |
| MBPP+ | 34.1% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Gemma 2B: —, Qwen3 235B-A22B: 33.9 (#51)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | Qwen3 235B-A22B |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 52.1% |
| Vending-Bench 2 | — | -11.34 |
Reasoning Gemma 2B leads
Gemma 2B: 18.8 (#275), Qwen3 235B-A22B: 15.7 (#311)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | Qwen3 235B-A22B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 989 | 1433 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 94.2 | 143.85 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | — | 1.3% |
| SimpleBench | — | 31% |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 69.4% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | — | 11% |
| CritPt | — | 0% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 12% |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 9% |
| DTBench | — | 80.3% |
| LMCA | — | 29.3% |
| BIG-Bench Hard | 35.2% | — |
| ForecastBench | — | 59.7 |
| HellaSwag | 71.4% | — |
| PIQA | 77.3% | — |
| WinoGrande | 65.4% | — |
Math Qwen3 235B-A22B leads
Gemma 2B: 30.0 (#239), Qwen3 235B-A22B: 50.4 (#57)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | Qwen3 235B-A22B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1009 | 1432 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 86.7% |
| Omni-MATH | — | 71.8% |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 68.9% |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 8.5% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | — | 0% |
| GSM8K | 17.7% | — |
Knowledge Not comparable
Gemma 2B: —, Qwen3 235B-A22B: 49.6 (#73)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | Qwen3 235B-A22B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 80.1% |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 40.4% |
| MMLU-Pro | — | 84.4% |
| Confabulations | — | 15.6% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 9.3% |
| GPQA (HELM) | — | 72.7% |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1463 |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | 42.1% | — |
| BoolQ | 69.4% | — |
| MMLU | 42.3% | — |
| TriviaQA | 53.2% | — |
Multilingual Qwen3 235B-A22B leads
Gemma 2B: 23.0 (#294), Qwen3 235B-A22B: 52.3 (#89)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | Qwen3 235B-A22B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 958 | 1409 |
| LMArena Chinese | 986 | 1481 |
| LMArena Russian | 937 | 1411 |
| LMArena French | — | 1445 |
| LMArena German | — | 1433 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1399 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1391 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1430 |
Instruction Following Qwen3 235B-A22B leads
Gemma 2B: 48.5 (#302), Qwen3 235B-A22B: 72.6 (#136)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | Qwen3 235B-A22B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 970 | 1408 |
| IFEval | — | 83.5% |
Long Context Qwen3 235B-A22B leads
Gemma 2B: 29.9 (#291), Qwen3 235B-A22B: 46.1 (#26)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | Qwen3 235B-A22B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 981 | 1426 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 75% |
Writing & Preference Qwen3 235B-A22B leads
Gemma 2B: 24.0 (#308), Qwen3 235B-A22B: 59.6 (#108)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | Qwen3 235B-A22B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1002 | 1419 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 987 | 1384 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 945 | 1432 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | — | 83% |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 1366 |
| WildBench | — | 86.6% |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemma 2B better than Qwen3 235B-A22B?
Qwen3 235B-A22B is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.5 to 29.6 on the Noometry Index.
Is Gemma 2B or Qwen3 235B-A22B better for coding?
Qwen3 235B-A22B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 44.3 versus 29.4 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Gemma 2B and Qwen3 235B-A22B share?
12 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 2B has 23 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3 235B-A22B has 49.