Model comparison
Gemma 3 12B vs Qwen2.5-Max
Qwen2.5-Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.7 to 32.1 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 13 shared benchmarks.
Google
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 13 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 3 12B scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen2.5-Max in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Qwen2.5-Max leads 36.9 to 22.3.
- Gemma 3 12B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Gemma 3 12B | Qwen2.5-Max | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | |
| Noometry Index | 32.1 | 40.7 |
| Released | 2025-03-12 | 2025-01-25 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | 131K | — |
| Max output | 8K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.05 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.15 | — |
| Results tracked | 24 | 27 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Qwen2.5-Max leads
Gemma 3 12B: 31.7 (#280), Qwen2.5-Max: 41.8 (#117)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 12B | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1281 | 1359 |
| SciCode | 17.4% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | — | 64.4% |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Gemma 3 12B: 25.5 (#108), Qwen2.5-Max: —
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 12B | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 30.4% | — |
Reasoning Qwen2.5-Max leads
Gemma 3 12B: 15.7 (#313), Qwen2.5-Max: 25.6 (#147)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 12B | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1309 | 1360 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 123.5 | 132.53 |
| CritPt | 0% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 0% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | — | 51.4% |
| DTBench | 48.8% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | — | 67.9% |
| LMCA | 4.5% | — |
| LiveBench | — | 62.3% |
Math Qwen2.5-Max leads
Gemma 3 12B: 22.3 (#279), Qwen2.5-Max: 36.9 (#162)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 12B | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1307 | 1369 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 16.7% | — |
| LiveBench Math | — | 58.4% |
Knowledge Qwen2.5-Max leads
Gemma 3 12B: 26.5 (#257), Qwen2.5-Max: 35.3 (#186)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 12B | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1248 | 1337 |
| GPQA Diamond | 39.5% | — |
| Confabulations | — | 21.8% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 4.4% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Gemma 3 12B: —, Qwen2.5-Max: —
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 12B | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| MindCube | 46.7% | — |
Multilingual Qwen2.5-Max leads
Gemma 3 12B: 45.7 (#165), Qwen2.5-Max: 48.1 (#146)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 12B | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1318 | 1352 |
| LMArena German | 1370 | 1350 |
| LMArena Russian | 1335 | 1353 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1382 |
| LMArena French | — | 1396 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1300 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1304 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1377 |
Instruction Following Qwen2.5-Max leads
Gemma 3 12B: 68.6 (#186), Qwen2.5-Max: 71.3 (#152)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 12B | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1299 | 1335 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | — | 75.3% |
Long Context Qwen2.5-Max leads
Gemma 3 12B: 40.0 (#162), Qwen2.5-Max: 41.4 (#142)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 12B | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1317 | 1358 |
Writing & Preference Qwen2.5-Max leads
Gemma 3 12B: 47.5 (#209), Qwen2.5-Max: 55.4 (#146)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 12B | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1334 | 1367 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1331 | 1339 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1334 | 1364 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | — | 72.9% |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1126 | — |
| LiveBench Language | — | 56.3% |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemma 3 12B better than Qwen2.5-Max?
Qwen2.5-Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.7 to 32.1 on the Noometry Index.
Is Gemma 3 12B or Qwen2.5-Max better for coding?
Qwen2.5-Max scores higher on coding benchmarks: 41.8 versus 31.7 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Gemma 3 12B and Qwen2.5-Max share?
13 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 3 12B has 24 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5-Max has 27.