# Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) vs Qwen3.8 Max

> Qwen3.8 Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 56.8 to 35.1 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/gemini-2-0-flash-vs-qwen3-8-max
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 22

## Summary

- They share 22 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3.8 Max in 10 categories; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Qwen3.8 Max leads 54.4 to 15.2.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 57.8% for Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) and 100% for Qwen3.8 Max.

## Snapshot

| | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Qwen3.8 Max |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Google | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 35.1 | 56.8 |
| Rank | 228 | 22 |
| Context | — | 1M |
| Input $/M | — | $2 |
| Output $/M | — | $6 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |

## Coding

- Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 28.4 (#315)
- Qwen3.8 Max: 53.5 (#29)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Qwen3.8 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1350 | 1502 |
| DeepSWE | — | 57.5% |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 13.5% | — |
| Aider Polyglot | 38.2% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1674 |
| FrontierSWE | — | 17.8% |
| SciCode | — | 53.2% |
| WeirdML | 25.8% | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 45.9% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 63.4% | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 59.9% | — |
| CadEval | 30% | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 28.1 (#92)
- Qwen3.8 Max: 45.4 (#14)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Qwen3.8 Max |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | — | 63.3% |
| TheAgentCompany | 11.4% | — |
| τ²-bench Banking | — | 55.1% |
| GDP.pdf | — | 23.2% |

## Reasoning

- Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 15.2 (#318)
- Qwen3.8 Max: 54.4 (#26)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Qwen3.8 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1346 | 1496 |
| DTBench | 63.2% | 92% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 135.36 | 156.41 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 1.3% | — |
| SimpleBench | 31.1% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 37.8% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 88.3% |
| CritPt | — | 20% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 40% |
| EnigmaEval | 1.1% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 78.2% | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 38% |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 69.4% | — |
| LMCA | — | 46.2% |
| LiveBench | 66.9% | — |

## Math

- Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 37.9 (#146)
- Qwen3.8 Max: 73.2 (#20)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Qwen3.8 Max |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 57.8% | 100% |
| LMArena Math | 1352 | 1499 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 74.7% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | — | 46.3% |
| ProofBench | — | 58% |
| Omni-MATH | 45.9% | — |
| LiveBench Math | 75.8% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 82.2% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 1.7% | — |

## Knowledge

- Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 32.0 (#213)
- Qwen3.8 Max: 61.7 (#27)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Qwen3.8 Max |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 64.1% | 92.7% |
| LMArena Expert | 1339 | 1507 |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 6.6% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 47.3% |
| MMLU-Pro | 73.7% | — |
| Confabulations | 12.4% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 55.6% | — |
| MMLU | 79.7% | — |

## Multimodal

- Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 36.5 (#79)
- Qwen3.8 Max: 37.2 (#75)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Qwen3.8 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1158 | 1314 |
| GeoBench | 77% | — |
| Furniture Assembly | — | 20% |

## Multilingual

- Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 47.4 (#149)
- Qwen3.8 Max: 56.7 (#18)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Qwen3.8 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1342 | 1472 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1373 | 1538 |
| LMArena French | 1391 | 1503 |
| LMArena German | 1353 | 1483 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1294 | 1467 |
| LMArena Korean | 1313 | 1461 |
| LMArena Russian | 1351 | 1481 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1363 | 1492 |

## Instruction Following

- Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 74.4 (#97)
- Qwen3.8 Max: 77.6 (#17)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Qwen3.8 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1336 | 1479 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 85.8% | — |
| IFEval | 84.1% | — |

## Long Context

- Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 38.1 (#203)
- Qwen3.8 Max: 45.6 (#31)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Qwen3.8 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1344 | 1489 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | 61.1% | — |

## Writing & Preference

- Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 49.5 (#190)
- Qwen3.8 Max: 67.1 (#30)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Qwen3.8 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1354 | 1483 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1340 | 1479 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1350 | 1489 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 73.8% | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1128 | — |
| WildBench | 80% | — |
| LiveBench Language | 51.3% | — |

## FAQ

### Is Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) better than Qwen3.8 Max?

Qwen3.8 Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 56.8 to 35.1 on the Noometry Index.

### Is Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) or Qwen3.8 Max better for coding?

Qwen3.8 Max scores higher on coding benchmarks: 53.5 versus 28.4 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) and Qwen3.8 Max share?

22 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) has 54 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.8 Max has 39.