# Gemini 1.0 Pro vs Qwen2.5-Max

> Qwen2.5-Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.7 to 27.3 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/gemini-1-0-pro-vs-qwen2-5-max
- Last updated: 2026-10-12
- Shared benchmarks: 17

## Summary

- They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 1.0 Pro scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen2.5-Max in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Qwen2.5-Max leads 36.9 to 9.3.

## Snapshot

| | Gemini 1.0 Pro | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Google | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 27.3 | 40.7 |
| Rank | 332 | 146 |
| Context | — | — |
| Input $/M | — | — |
| Output $/M | — | — |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |

## Coding

- Gemini 1.0 Pro: 32.2 (#275)
- Qwen2.5-Max: 41.8 (#117)

| Benchmark | Gemini 1.0 Pro | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1108 | 1359 |
| LiveBench Coding | — | 64.4% |
| HumanEval+ | 55.5% | — |
| MBPP+ | 61.4% | — |

## Reasoning

- Gemini 1.0 Pro: 17.1 (#296)
- Qwen2.5-Max: 25.6 (#147)

| Benchmark | Gemini 1.0 Pro | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1109 | 1360 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 117.04 | 132.53 |
| LiveBench Reasoning | — | 51.4% |
| DTBench | 45.9% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | — | 67.9% |
| LiveBench | — | 62.3% |

## Math

- Gemini 1.0 Pro: 9.3 (#321)
- Qwen2.5-Max: 36.9 (#162)

| Benchmark | Gemini 1.0 Pro | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1132 | 1369 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 1.1% | — |
| LiveBench Math | — | 58.4% |
| MATH Level 5 | 11.2% | — |

## Knowledge

- Gemini 1.0 Pro: 15.6 (#291)
- Qwen2.5-Max: 35.3 (#186)

| Benchmark | Gemini 1.0 Pro | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1059 | 1337 |
| GPQA Diamond | 34% | — |
| Confabulations | — | 21.8% |
| MMLU | 70% | — |

## Multilingual

- Gemini 1.0 Pro: 33.4 (#252)
- Qwen2.5-Max: 48.1 (#146)

| Benchmark | Gemini 1.0 Pro | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1138 | 1352 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1124 | 1382 |
| LMArena French | 1145 | 1396 |
| LMArena German | 1125 | 1350 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1023 | 1300 |
| LMArena Russian | 1186 | 1353 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1119 | 1377 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1304 |

## Instruction Following

- Gemini 1.0 Pro: 57.6 (#267)
- Qwen2.5-Max: 71.3 (#152)

| Benchmark | Gemini 1.0 Pro | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1114 | 1335 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | — | 75.3% |

## Long Context

- Gemini 1.0 Pro: 34.3 (#249)
- Qwen2.5-Max: 41.4 (#142)

| Benchmark | Gemini 1.0 Pro | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1132 | 1358 |

## Writing & Preference

- Gemini 1.0 Pro: 36.0 (#264)
- Qwen2.5-Max: 55.4 (#146)

| Benchmark | Gemini 1.0 Pro | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1149 | 1367 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1131 | 1339 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1139 | 1364 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | — | 72.9% |
| LiveBench Language | — | 56.3% |

## FAQ

### Is Gemini 1.0 Pro better than Qwen2.5-Max?

Qwen2.5-Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.7 to 27.3 on the Noometry Index.

### Is Gemini 1.0 Pro or Qwen2.5-Max better for coding?

Qwen2.5-Max scores higher on coding benchmarks: 41.8 versus 32.2 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do Gemini 1.0 Pro and Qwen2.5-Max share?

17 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 1.0 Pro has 24 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5-Max has 27.