Model comparison
Gemma 3 1B vs Qwen3-1.7B
Qwen3-1.7B is the stronger model overall, scoring 26.6 to 21.1 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 4 shared benchmarks.
Google
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 4 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 3 1B scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3-1.7B in 4 categories; 3 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen3-1.7B leads 19.6 to 7.0.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard: 7.2% for Gemma 3 1B and 28.4% for Qwen3-1.7B.
Side by side
| Gemma 3 1B | Qwen3-1.7B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | |
| Noometry Index | 21.1 | 26.6 |
| Released | 2025-03-12 | 2025-04-29 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | — | — |
| Max output | — | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Results tracked | 4 | 4 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Agentic & Tool Use Qwen3-1.7B leads
Gemma 3 1B: 13.7 (#152), Qwen3-1.7B: 24.7 (#115)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 1B | Qwen3-1.7B |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 7.2% | 28.4% |
Reasoning Too close to call
Gemma 3 1B: 19.2 (#264), Qwen3-1.7B: 19.2 (#267)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 1B | Qwen3-1.7B |
|---|---|---|
| Chess Puzzles | 0% | 0% |
Math Qwen3-1.7B leads
Gemma 3 1B: 10.2 (#316), Qwen3-1.7B: 16.3 (#294)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 1B | Qwen3-1.7B |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 1.1% | 8.1% |
Knowledge Qwen3-1.7B leads
Gemma 3 1B: 7.0 (#314), Qwen3-1.7B: 19.6 (#278)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 1B | Qwen3-1.7B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 19.9% | 38% |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemma 3 1B better than Qwen3-1.7B?
Qwen3-1.7B is the stronger model overall, scoring 26.6 to 21.1 on the Noometry Index.
How many benchmarks do Gemma 3 1B and Qwen3-1.7B share?
4 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 3 1B has 4 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3-1.7B has 4.