Model comparison
Gemma 7B vs Qwen3-1.7B
Gemma 7B is the stronger model overall, scoring 30.0 to 26.6 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.
Google
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- The widest gap is in math, where Gemma 7B leads 31.2 to 16.3.
Side by side
| Gemma 7B | Qwen3-1.7B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | |
| Noometry Index | 30.0 | 26.6 |
| Released | 2024-02-21 | 2025-04-29 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | — | — |
| Max output | — | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Results tracked | 27 | 4 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Not comparable
Gemma 7B: 30.5 (#294), Qwen3-1.7B: —
| Benchmark | Gemma 7B | Qwen3-1.7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1048 | — |
| HumanEval+ | 28.7% | — |
| MBPP+ | 43.4% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Gemma 7B: —, Qwen3-1.7B: 24.7 (#115)
| Benchmark | Gemma 7B | Qwen3-1.7B |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 28.4% |
Reasoning Too close to call
Gemma 7B: 19.9 (#249), Qwen3-1.7B: 19.2 (#267)
| Benchmark | Gemma 7B | Qwen3-1.7B |
|---|---|---|
| Chess Puzzles | — | 0% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1042 | — |
| Adversarial NLI | 48.7% | — |
| BIG-Bench Hard | 55.1% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 111.99 | — |
| HellaSwag | 82.2% | — |
| PIQA | 81.2% | — |
| WinoGrande | 79% | — |
Math Gemma 7B leads
Gemma 7B: 31.2 (#228), Qwen3-1.7B: 16.3 (#294)
| Benchmark | Gemma 7B | Qwen3-1.7B |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 8.1% |
| LMArena Math | 1066 | — |
| GSM8K | 46.4% | — |
Knowledge Gemma 7B leads
Gemma 7B: 27.3 (#252), Qwen3-1.7B: 19.6 (#278)
| Benchmark | Gemma 7B | Qwen3-1.7B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 38% |
| LMArena Expert | 1001 | — |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | 78.3% | — |
| BoolQ | 83.2% | — |
| MMLU | 66.1% | — |
| OpenBookQA | 78.6% | — |
| TriviaQA | 72.3% | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
Gemma 7B: 25.1 (#287), Qwen3-1.7B: —
| Benchmark | Gemma 7B | Qwen3-1.7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 999 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1035 | — |
| LMArena French | 1025 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 993 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Gemma 7B: 51.5 (#295), Qwen3-1.7B: —
| Benchmark | Gemma 7B | Qwen3-1.7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1017 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
Gemma 7B: 31.1 (#282), Qwen3-1.7B: —
| Benchmark | Gemma 7B | Qwen3-1.7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1022 | — |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Gemma 7B: 27.1 (#302), Qwen3-1.7B: —
| Benchmark | Gemma 7B | Qwen3-1.7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1056 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1024 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 963 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemma 7B better than Qwen3-1.7B?
Gemma 7B is the stronger model overall, scoring 30.0 to 26.6 on the Noometry Index.
How many benchmarks do Gemma 7B and Qwen3-1.7B share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 7B has 27 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3-1.7B has 4.