Model comparison
Gemma 3 4B vs Qwen2.5 32B Instruct
Qwen2.5 32B Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 30.1 to 28.1 on the Noometry Index. Gemma 3 4B costs 24× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen2.5 32B Instruct's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 4 shared benchmarks.
Google
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 4 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 3 4B scores higher in 1 category and Qwen2.5 32B Instruct in 3 categories; 3 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen2.5 32B Instruct leads 24.9 to 11.8.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is GPQA Diamond: 23.2% for Gemma 3 4B and 46.1% for Qwen2.5 32B Instruct.
- Gemma 3 4B is cheaper at $0.04 / $0.08 per million input/output tokens, against $0.70 / $2.80 for Qwen2.5 32B Instruct.
Side by side
| Gemma 3 4B | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | |
| Noometry Index | 28.1 | 30.1 |
| Released | 2025-03-12 | 2024-09 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 131K | 131K |
| Max output | 4K | 8K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.04 | $0.70 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.08 | $2.80 |
| Results tracked | 22 | 7 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Qwen2.5 32B Instruct leads
Gemma 3 4B: 35.9 (#215), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: 38.7 (#169)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 4B | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 45% |
| LMArena Coding | 1230 | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 52.3% |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Gemma 3 4B: 20.9 (#142), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 4B | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 19.6% | — |
Reasoning Qwen2.5 32B Instruct leads
Gemma 3 4B: 13.2 (#335), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: 19.2 (#266)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 4B | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Chess Puzzles | 0% | 0% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 116.02 | 128.52 |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 25.2% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1253 | — |
| DTBench | 50.9% | — |
| LMCA | 2.8% | — |
Math Too close to call
Gemma 3 4B: 16.8 (#292), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: 16.2 (#296)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 4B | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 7.5% | 7.4% |
| LMArena Math | 1239 | — |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 56.1% |
Knowledge Qwen2.5 32B Instruct leads
Gemma 3 4B: 11.8 (#299), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: 24.9 (#266)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 4B | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 23.2% | 46.1% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 6.4% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1223 | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
Gemma 3 4B: 42.5 (#194), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 4B | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1273 | — |
| LMArena German | 1281 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1294 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Gemma 3 4B: 65.2 (#225), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 4B | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1239 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
Gemma 3 4B: 38.7 (#194), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 4B | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1273 | — |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Gemma 3 4B: 42.0 (#239), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 4B | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1291 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1271 | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1068 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1255 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemma 3 4B better than Qwen2.5 32B Instruct?
Qwen2.5 32B Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 30.1 to 28.1 on the Noometry Index. Gemma 3 4B costs 24× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen2.5 32B Instruct's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, Gemma 3 4B or Qwen2.5 32B Instruct?
Gemma 3 4B is cheaper. It lists at $0.04 per million input tokens and $0.08 per million output tokens; Qwen2.5 32B Instruct lists at $0.70 and $2.80.
Is Gemma 3 4B or Qwen2.5 32B Instruct better for coding?
Qwen2.5 32B Instruct scores higher on coding benchmarks: 38.7 versus 35.9 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Both accept 131K tokens.
How many benchmarks do Gemma 3 4B and Qwen2.5 32B Instruct share?
4 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 3 4B has 22 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5 32B Instruct has 7.