Noometry

Model comparison

Gemma 3n E4b IT vs Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct

Gemma 3n E4b IT is the stronger model overall, scoring 36.7 to 29.4 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 1 shared benchmarks.

Gemma 3n E4b IT Google

36.7

Rank #203 Confirmed

Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct Alibaba (Qwen)

29.4

Rank #298 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 1 benchmark with published results for both. Gemma 3n E4b IT scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct in 1 category, but none of those gaps is larger than the uncertainty.
  • Gemma 3n E4b IT is cheaper at $0.06 / $0.12 per million input/output tokens, against $2.80 / $8.40 for Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct.
  • Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct accepts more context: 131K tokens versus 33K.

Side by side

Gemma 3n E4b ITQwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct
ProviderGoogleAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index36.729.4
Released2025-05-202024-09
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window33K131K
Max output33K8K
Input $ / M tokens$0.06$2.80
Output $ / M tokens$0.12$8.40
Results tracked186

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

Category by category

Coding Not comparable

Gemma 3n E4b IT: 36.4 (#193), Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct: —

BenchmarkGemma 3n E4b ITQwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct
LMArena Coding1269—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Gemma 3n E4b IT: —, Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct: 18.4 (#136)

BenchmarkGemma 3n E4b ITQwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct
OSWorld—5%

Reasoning Too close to call

Gemma 3n E4b IT: 19.2 (#239), Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct: 20.0 (#228)

BenchmarkGemma 3n E4b ITQwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct
Kagi LLM Benchmark31.5%36%
LMArena Hard Prompts1284—

Math Not comparable

Gemma 3n E4b IT: 32.5 (#186), Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct: —

BenchmarkGemma 3n E4b ITQwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct
LMArena Math1251—

Knowledge Not comparable

Gemma 3n E4b IT: 33.6 (#193), Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct: —

BenchmarkGemma 3n E4b ITQwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct
LMArena Expert1245—

Multimodal Not comparable

Gemma 3n E4b IT: —, Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct: 32.9 (#92)

BenchmarkGemma 3n E4b ITQwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct
LMArena Vision—1107
Video-MME—73.5%
GeoBench—62%
SpatialViz-Bench—33.3%

Multilingual Not comparable

Gemma 3n E4b IT: 43.5 (#179), Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct: —

BenchmarkGemma 3n E4b ITQwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct
LMArena Non-English1285—
LMArena Chinese1310—
LMArena French1330—
LMArena German1312—
LMArena Japanese1274—
LMArena Korean1259—
LMArena Russian1288—
LMArena Spanish1305—

Instruction Following Not comparable

Gemma 3n E4b IT: 66.3 (#205), Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct: —

BenchmarkGemma 3n E4b ITQwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct
LMArena Instruction Following1255—

Long Context Not comparable

Gemma 3n E4b IT: 38.8 (#185), Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct: —

BenchmarkGemma 3n E4b ITQwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct
LMArena Longer Query1277—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Gemma 3n E4b IT: 50.3 (#181), Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct: —

BenchmarkGemma 3n E4b ITQwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct
LMArena Text1306—
LMArena Creative Writing1287—
LMArena Multi-Turn1276—

Frequently asked questions

Is Gemma 3n E4b IT better than Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct?

Gemma 3n E4b IT is the stronger model overall, scoring 36.7 to 29.4 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, Gemma 3n E4b IT or Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct?

Gemma 3n E4b IT is cheaper. It lists at $0.06 per million input tokens and $0.12 per million output tokens; Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct lists at $2.80 and $8.40.

Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct does, with 131K tokens against 33K.

How many benchmarks do Gemma 3n E4b IT and Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct share?

1 benchmark has published results for both models. Gemma 3n E4b IT has 18 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct has 6.

Related comparisons

Go deeper