Model comparison

Gemma 4 31B IT vs Qwen2.5 7B Instruct

Gemma 4 31B IT is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.2 to 28.6 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 6 shared benchmarks.

Gemma 4 31B IT Google

43.2

Rank #85 Confirmed

Qwen2.5 7B Instruct Alibaba (Qwen)

28.6

Rank #314 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 6 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 4 31B IT scores higher in 6 categories and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct in 0 categories; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where Gemma 4 31B IT leads 41.3 to 11.8.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 73.3% for Gemma 4 31B IT and 2.5% for Qwen2.5 7B Instruct.
  • Gemma 4 31B IT is cheaper at $0.09 / $0.34 per million input/output tokens, against $0.17 / $0.70 for Qwen2.5 7B Instruct.
  • Gemma 4 31B IT accepts more context: 262K tokens versus 131K.

Side by side

Gemma 4 31B IT and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct specifications
Gemma 4 31B ITQwen2.5 7B Instruct
ProviderGoogleAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index43.228.6
Released2026-04-022024-09
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window262K131K
Max output33K8K
Input $ / M tokens$0.09$0.17
Output $ / M tokens$0.34$0.70
Results tracked3515

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

Category by category

Coding Gemma 4 31B IT leads

Gemma 4 31B IT: 41.9 (#98), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 35.9 (#204)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 4 31B ITQwen2.5 7B Instruct
LMArena WebDev1364—
SciCode43.4%—
WeirdML52.3%—
BigCodeBench Instruct—37.6%
LMArena Coding1459—
BigCodeBench Complete—46.1%
ALE-Bench925.5—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Gemma 4 31B IT: —, Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 23.5 (#117)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 4 31B ITQwen2.5 7B Instruct
BALROG—7.8%

Reasoning Gemma 4 31B IT leads

Gemma 4 31B IT: 26.4 (#119), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 14.3 (#317)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 4 31B ITQwen2.5 7B Instruct
Chess Puzzles5%0%
DTBench82.7%47.7%
LMCA39.3%6.4%
Epoch Capabilities Index142.74118.44
Kagi LLM Benchmark63.5%—
NYT Connections (extended)70.6%—
CritPt1.4%—
Thematic Generalization53%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1448—
Surface Evolver Bench30.6%—

Math Gemma 4 31B IT leads

Gemma 4 31B IT: 41.3 (#72), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 11.8 (#300)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 4 31B ITQwen2.5 7B Instruct
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202573.3%2.5%
Omni-MATH—29.4%
LMArena Math1464—

Knowledge Gemma 4 31B IT leads

Gemma 4 31B IT: 37.9 (#141), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 17.0 (#281)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 4 31B ITQwen2.5 7B Instruct
GPQA Diamond75.8%35.5%
SimpleQA Verified10.4%—
MMLU-Pro—53.9%
Vectara Hallucination Rate7.4%—
GPQA (HELM)—34.1%
LMArena Expert1465—
MMLU—72.9%

Multimodal Not comparable

Gemma 4 31B IT: 41.0 (#32), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: —

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 4 31B ITQwen2.5 7B Instruct
LMArena Vision1278—
LMArena Document1425—

Multilingual Not comparable

Gemma 4 31B IT: 54.0 (#52), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: —

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 4 31B ITQwen2.5 7B Instruct
LMArena Non-English1431—
LMArena Chinese1478—
LMArena French1436—
LMArena Russian1462—
LMArena Spanish1443—

Instruction Following Gemma 4 31B IT leads

Gemma 4 31B IT: 75.6 (#58), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 63.4 (#226)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 4 31B ITQwen2.5 7B Instruct
IFEval—74.1%
LMArena Instruction Following1433—

Long Context Not comparable

Gemma 4 31B IT: 44.2 (#67), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: —

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 4 31B ITQwen2.5 7B Instruct
LMArena Longer Query1446—

Writing & Preference Gemma 4 31B IT leads

Gemma 4 31B IT: 60.7 (#92), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 48.8 (#194)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 4 31B ITQwen2.5 7B Instruct
LMArena Text1443—
LMArena Creative Writing1416—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1368—
WildBench—73.1%
EQ-Bench 41120—
LMArena Multi-Turn1452—

Frequently asked questions

Is Gemma 4 31B IT better than Qwen2.5 7B Instruct?

Gemma 4 31B IT is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.2 to 28.6 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, Gemma 4 31B IT or Qwen2.5 7B Instruct?

Gemma 4 31B IT is cheaper. It lists at $0.09 per million input tokens and $0.34 per million output tokens; Qwen2.5 7B Instruct lists at $0.17 and $0.70.

Is Gemma 4 31B IT or Qwen2.5 7B Instruct better for coding?

Gemma 4 31B IT scores higher on coding benchmarks: 41.9 versus 35.9 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Gemma 4 31B IT does, with 262K tokens against 131K.

How many benchmarks do Gemma 4 31B IT and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct share?

6 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 4 31B IT has 35 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct has 15.

Related comparisons

Go deeper