# Gemini 2.0 Pro vs Qwen1.5-32B

> Gemini 2.0 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.1 to 30.5 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/gemini-2-0-pro-vs-qwen1-5-32b
- Last updated: 2026-10-12
- Shared benchmarks: 1

## Summary

- They share 1 benchmark with published results for both. Gemini 2.0 Pro scores higher in 6 categories and Qwen1.5-32B in 1 category; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Gemini 2.0 Pro leads 36.5 to 13.5.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is GPQA Diamond: 65.7% for Gemini 2.0 Pro and 30.7% for Qwen1.5-32B.
- Qwen1.5-32B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Google | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 39.1 | 30.5 |
| Rank | 173 | 293 |
| Context | — | — |
| Input $/M | — | — |
| Output $/M | — | — |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |

## Coding

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: 37.8 (#187)
- Qwen1.5-32B: 31.7 (#282)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| Aider Polyglot | 35.6% | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 32.3% |
| LiveBench Coding | 63.5% | — |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1155 |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 42% |

## Reasoning

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: 22.3 (#198)
- Qwen1.5-32B: 21.8 (#212)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| EnigmaEval | 0.7% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 60.1% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1130 |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 68% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 135.06 | — |
| LiveBench | 65.1% | — |

## Math

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: 39.7 (#100)
- Qwen1.5-32B: 33.0 (#207)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Math | 71% | — |
| LMArena Math | — | 1155 |
| MATH Level 5 | 83.5% | — |

## Knowledge

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: 36.5 (#167)
- Qwen1.5-32B: 13.5 (#296)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 65.7% | 30.7% |
| Confabulations | 18.4% | — |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1126 |
| MMLU | — | 74.4% |

## Multilingual

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: —
- Qwen1.5-32B: 31.4 (#259)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1106 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1177 |
| LMArena French | — | 1101 |
| LMArena German | — | 1058 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1027 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1008 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1073 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1089 |

## Instruction Following

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: 75.5 (#59)
- Qwen1.5-32B: 57.7 (#265)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 83.4% | — |
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1116 |

## Long Context

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: 29.2 (#292)
- Qwen1.5-32B: 34.7 (#246)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | 41.7% | — |
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1146 |

## Writing & Preference

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: 52.7 (#165)
- Qwen1.5-32B: 34.2 (#271)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1137 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1083 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1140 |
| LiveBench Language | 44.9% | — |

## FAQ

### Is Gemini 2.0 Pro better than Qwen1.5-32B?

Gemini 2.0 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.1 to 30.5 on the Noometry Index.

### Is Gemini 2.0 Pro or Qwen1.5-32B better for coding?

Gemini 2.0 Pro scores higher on coding benchmarks: 37.8 versus 31.7 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do Gemini 2.0 Pro and Qwen1.5-32B share?

1 benchmark has published results for both models. Gemini 2.0 Pro has 14 scored results on Noometry and Qwen1.5-32B has 21.