Model comparison

Gemma 7B vs Qwen3.6 27B

Qwen3.6 27B is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.2 to 30.0 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 1 shared benchmarks.

Gemma 7B Google

30.0

Rank #299 Confirmed

Qwen3.6 27B Alibaba (Qwen)

42.2

Rank #117 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 1 benchmark with published results for both. Gemma 7B scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3.6 27B in 5 categories; 5 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen3.6 27B leads 52.4 to 27.3.

Side by side

Gemma 7B and Qwen3.6 27B specifications
Gemma 7BQwen3.6 27B
ProviderGoogleAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index30.042.2
Released2024-02-212026-04-22
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window—262K
Max output—66K
Input $ / M tokens—$0.60
Output $ / M tokens—$3.60
Results tracked2711

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

Category by category

Coding Qwen3.6 27B leads

Gemma 7B: 30.5 (#294), Qwen3.6 27B: 39.1 (#163)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 7BQwen3.6 27B
SciCode—37.3%
LMArena Coding1048—
HumanEval+28.7%—
MBPP+43.4%—

Reasoning Qwen3.6 27B leads

Gemma 7B: 19.9 (#249), Qwen3.6 27B: 25.0 (#153)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 7BQwen3.6 27B
Epoch Capabilities Index111.99146.5
CritPt—0.9%
Chess Puzzles—22%
LMArena Hard Prompts1042—
Mystery Game Puzzles—7%
DTBench—78.1%
LMCA—34.5%
Adversarial NLI48.7%—
BIG-Bench Hard55.1%—
HellaSwag82.2%—
PIQA81.2%—
WinoGrande79%—

Math Qwen3.6 27B leads

Gemma 7B: 31.2 (#228), Qwen3.6 27B: 48.5 (#62)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 7BQwen3.6 27B
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)—35.1%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—91.1%
LMArena Math1066—
GSM8K46.4%—

Knowledge Qwen3.6 27B leads

Gemma 7B: 27.3 (#252), Qwen3.6 27B: 52.4 (#63)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 7BQwen3.6 27B
GPQA Diamond—85.9%
LMArena Expert1001—
ARC (AI2) Challenge78.3%—
BoolQ83.2%—
MMLU66.1%—
OpenBookQA78.6%—
TriviaQA72.3%—

Multilingual Not comparable

Gemma 7B: 25.1 (#287), Qwen3.6 27B: —

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 7BQwen3.6 27B
LMArena Non-English999—
LMArena Chinese1035—
LMArena French1025—
LMArena Russian993—

Instruction Following Not comparable

Gemma 7B: 51.5 (#295), Qwen3.6 27B: —

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 7BQwen3.6 27B
LMArena Instruction Following1017—

Long Context Not comparable

Gemma 7B: 31.1 (#282), Qwen3.6 27B: —

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 7BQwen3.6 27B
LMArena Longer Query1022—

Writing & Preference Qwen3.6 27B leads

Gemma 7B: 27.1 (#302), Qwen3.6 27B: 50.3 (#181)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 7BQwen3.6 27B
LMArena Text1056—
LMArena Creative Writing1024—
EQ-Bench 4—1026
LMArena Multi-Turn963—

Frequently asked questions

Is Gemma 7B better than Qwen3.6 27B?

Qwen3.6 27B is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.2 to 30.0 on the Noometry Index.

Is Gemma 7B or Qwen3.6 27B better for coding?

Qwen3.6 27B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 39.1 versus 30.5 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Gemma 7B and Qwen3.6 27B share?

1 benchmark has published results for both models. Gemma 7B has 27 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.6 27B has 11.

Related comparisons

Go deeper