Noometry

Model comparison

Gemma 2B vs Qwen3.6 Max Preview

Qwen3.6 Max Preview is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.5 to 29.6 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 12 shared benchmarks.

Gemma 2B Google

29.6

Rank #307 Confirmed

Qwen3.6 Max Preview Alibaba (Qwen)

51.5

Rank #43 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 2B scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3.6 Max Preview in 7 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Qwen3.6 Max Preview leads 63.8 to 24.0.
  • Gemma 2B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Gemma 2BQwen3.6 Max Preview
ProviderGoogleAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index29.651.5
Released2024-02-212026-04-20
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window—262K
Max output—66K
Input $ / M tokens—$1.30
Output $ / M tokens—$7.80
Results tracked2329

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding Qwen3.6 Max Preview leads

Gemma 2B: 29.4 (#305), Qwen3.6 Max Preview: 48.7 (#54)

BenchmarkGemma 2BQwen3.6 Max Preview
LMArena Coding10101471
SWE-bench Verified—76.7%
LMArena WebDev—1482
HumanEval+20.7%—
MBPP+34.1%—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Gemma 2B: —, Qwen3.6 Max Preview: —

BenchmarkGemma 2BQwen3.6 Max Preview
Vending-Bench 2—4,254

Reasoning Qwen3.6 Max Preview leads

Gemma 2B: 18.8 (#275), Qwen3.6 Max Preview: 41.7 (#53)

BenchmarkGemma 2BQwen3.6 Max Preview
LMArena Hard Prompts9891457
Epoch Capabilities Index94.2149.24
SimpleBench—63%
NYT Connections (extended)—74.1%
Chess Puzzles—20%
Mystery Game Puzzles—19%
DTBench—87.2%
LMCA—42.5%
BIG-Bench Hard35.2%—
HellaSwag71.4%—
PIQA77.3%—
WinoGrande65.4%—

Math Qwen3.6 Max Preview leads

Gemma 2B: 30.0 (#239), Qwen3.6 Max Preview: 54.1 (#46)

BenchmarkGemma 2BQwen3.6 Max Preview
LMArena Math10091465
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—91.1%
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)—23.1%
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)—4.2%
GSM8K17.7%—

Knowledge Not comparable

Gemma 2B: —, Qwen3.6 Max Preview: 57.6 (#39)

BenchmarkGemma 2BQwen3.6 Max Preview
GPQA Diamond—87.4%
SimpleQA Verified—52%
LMArena Expert—1478
ARC (AI2) Challenge42.1%—
BoolQ69.4%—
MMLU42.3%—
TriviaQA53.2%—

Multilingual Qwen3.6 Max Preview leads

Gemma 2B: 23.0 (#294), Qwen3.6 Max Preview: 54.2 (#48)

BenchmarkGemma 2BQwen3.6 Max Preview
LMArena Non-English9581437
LMArena Chinese9861487
LMArena Russian9371445
LMArena French—1449
LMArena Spanish—1454

Instruction Following Qwen3.6 Max Preview leads

Gemma 2B: 48.5 (#302), Qwen3.6 Max Preview: 75.7 (#55)

BenchmarkGemma 2BQwen3.6 Max Preview
LMArena Instruction Following9701438

Long Context Qwen3.6 Max Preview leads

Gemma 2B: 29.9 (#291), Qwen3.6 Max Preview: 44.6 (#61)

BenchmarkGemma 2BQwen3.6 Max Preview
LMArena Longer Query9811457

Writing & Preference Qwen3.6 Max Preview leads

Gemma 2B: 24.0 (#308), Qwen3.6 Max Preview: 63.8 (#60)

BenchmarkGemma 2BQwen3.6 Max Preview
LMArena Text10021447
LMArena Creative Writing9871435
LMArena Multi-Turn9451456

Frequently asked questions

Is Gemma 2B better than Qwen3.6 Max Preview?

Qwen3.6 Max Preview is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.5 to 29.6 on the Noometry Index.

Is Gemma 2B or Qwen3.6 Max Preview better for coding?

Qwen3.6 Max Preview scores higher on coding benchmarks: 48.7 versus 29.4 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Gemma 2B and Qwen3.6 Max Preview share?

12 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 2B has 23 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.6 Max Preview has 29.

Related comparisons

Go deeper