# Gemini 2.0 Pro vs Qwen Max

> Gemini 2.0 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.1 to 34.7 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/gemini-2-0-pro-vs-qwen-max
- Last updated: 2026-10-11
- Shared benchmarks: 4

## Summary

- They share 4 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 2.0 Pro scores higher in 5 categories and Qwen Max in 2 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Gemini 2.0 Pro leads 39.7 to 22.3.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is Fiction.LiveBench: 41.7% for Gemini 2.0 Pro and 66.7% for Qwen Max.

## Snapshot

| | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Google | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 39.1 | 34.7 |
| Rank | 173 | 230 |
| Context | — | 33K |
| Input $/M | — | $1.60 |
| Output $/M | — | $6.40 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |

## Coding

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: 37.8 (#187)
- Qwen Max: 30.7 (#292)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| Aider Polyglot | 35.6% | 21.8% |
| LiveBench Coding | 63.5% | — |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1288 |

## Reasoning

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: 22.3 (#198)
- Qwen Max: 25.1 (#151)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| EnigmaEval | 0.7% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 60.1% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1269 |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 68% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 135.06 | — |
| LiveBench | 65.1% | — |

## Math

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: 39.7 (#100)
- Qwen Max: 22.3 (#276)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| MATH Level 5 | 83.5% | 67.2% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 16.1% |
| LiveBench Math | 71% | — |
| LMArena Math | — | 1275 |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 1% |

## Knowledge

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: 36.5 (#167)
- Qwen Max: 30.3 (#228)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 65.7% | 56.1% |
| Confabulations | 18.4% | — |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1248 |

## Multilingual

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: —
- Qwen Max: 41.8 (#202)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1263 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1254 |
| LMArena French | — | 1330 |
| LMArena German | — | 1254 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1205 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1142 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1274 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1290 |

## Instruction Following

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: 75.5 (#59)
- Qwen Max: 66.5 (#208)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 83.4% | — |
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1262 |

## Long Context

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: 29.2 (#292)
- Qwen Max: 39.4 (#180)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | 41.7% | 66.7% |
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1288 |

## Writing & Preference

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: 52.7 (#165)
- Qwen Max: 47.8 (#205)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1282 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1248 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1277 |
| LiveBench Language | 44.9% | — |

## FAQ

### Is Gemini 2.0 Pro better than Qwen Max?

Gemini 2.0 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.1 to 34.7 on the Noometry Index.

### Is Gemini 2.0 Pro or Qwen Max better for coding?

Gemini 2.0 Pro scores higher on coding benchmarks: 37.8 versus 30.7 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do Gemini 2.0 Pro and Qwen Max share?

4 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 2.0 Pro has 14 scored results on Noometry and Qwen Max has 23.