Model comparison
Gemma 3 1B vs Qwen1.5-32B
Qwen1.5-32B is the stronger model overall, scoring 30.0 to 20.7 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 1 shared benchmarks.
Google
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 1 benchmark with published results for both. Gemma 3 1B scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen1.5-32B in 3 categories; 3 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Qwen1.5-32B leads 30.5 to 9.6.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is GPQA Diamond: 19.9% for Gemma 3 1B and 30.7% for Qwen1.5-32B.
Side by side
| Gemma 3 1B | Qwen1.5-32B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | |
| Noometry Index | 20.7 | 30.0 |
| Released | 2025-03-12 | 2024-02-04 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | — | — |
| Max output | — | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Results tracked | 4 | 21 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Not comparable
Gemma 3 1B: —, Qwen1.5-32B: 31.1 (#278)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 1B | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 32.3% |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1155 |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 42% |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Gemma 3 1B: 13.5 (#144), Qwen1.5-32B: —
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 1B | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 7.2% | — |
Reasoning Qwen1.5-32B leads
Gemma 3 1B: 18.5 (#260), Qwen1.5-32B: 20.9 (#210)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 1B | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| Chess Puzzles | 0% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1131 |
Math Qwen1.5-32B leads
Gemma 3 1B: 9.6 (#310), Qwen1.5-32B: 30.5 (#207)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 1B | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 1.1% | — |
| LMArena Math | — | 1155 |
Knowledge Qwen1.5-32B leads
Gemma 3 1B: 7.1 (#309), Qwen1.5-32B: 13.5 (#291)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 1B | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 19.9% | 30.7% |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1126 |
| MMLU | — | 74.4% |
Multilingual Not comparable
Gemma 3 1B: —, Qwen1.5-32B: 31.6 (#254)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 1B | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1106 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1176 |
| LMArena French | — | 1100 |
| LMArena German | — | 1058 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1027 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1007 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1073 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1089 |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Gemma 3 1B: —, Qwen1.5-32B: 58.0 (#260)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 1B | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1116 |
Long Context Not comparable
Gemma 3 1B: —, Qwen1.5-32B: 34.7 (#241)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 1B | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1146 |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Gemma 3 1B: —, Qwen1.5-32B: 34.4 (#266)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 1B | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1137 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1083 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1140 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemma 3 1B better than Qwen1.5-32B?
Qwen1.5-32B is the stronger model overall, scoring 30.0 to 20.7 on the Noometry Index.
How many benchmarks do Gemma 3 1B and Qwen1.5-32B share?
1 benchmark has published results for both models. Gemma 3 1B has 4 scored results on Noometry and Qwen1.5-32B has 21.