# Gemini 2.0 Pro vs Qwen2.5-Max

> Qwen2.5-Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.1 to 38.6 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/gemini-2-0-pro-vs-qwen2-5-max
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 9

## Summary

- They share 9 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 2.0 Pro scores higher in 3 categories and Qwen2.5-Max in 4 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in long context, where Qwen2.5-Max leads 41.3 to 29.1.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is LiveBench Math: 71% for Gemini 2.0 Pro and 58.4% for Qwen2.5-Max.

## Snapshot

| | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Google | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 38.6 | 40.1 |
| Rank | 171 | 142 |
| Context | — | — |
| Input $/M | — | — |
| Output $/M | — | — |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |

## Coding

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: 37.4 (#182)
- Qwen2.5-Max: 41.2 (#118)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Coding | 63.5% | 64.4% |
| Aider Polyglot | 35.6% | — |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1359 |

## Reasoning

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: 21.6 (#194)
- Qwen2.5-Max: 24.6 (#144)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Reasoning | 60.1% | 51.4% |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 68% | 67.9% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 135.06 | 132.54 |
| LiveBench | 65.1% | 62.3% |
| EnigmaEval | 0.7% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1360 |

## Math

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: 37.1 (#101)
- Qwen2.5-Max: 34.3 (#162)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Math | 71% | 58.4% |
| LMArena Math | — | 1369 |
| MATH Level 5 | 83.5% | — |

## Knowledge

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: 36.5 (#156)
- Qwen2.5-Max: 34.8 (#181)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| Confabulations | 18.4% | 21.8% |
| GPQA Diamond | 65.7% | — |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1337 |

## Multilingual

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: —
- Qwen2.5-Max: 48.3 (#140)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1352 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1382 |
| LMArena French | — | 1396 |
| LMArena German | — | 1350 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1299 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1304 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1353 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1377 |

## Instruction Following

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: 75.6 (#57)
- Qwen2.5-Max: 71.5 (#147)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 83.4% | 75.3% |
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1335 |

## Long Context

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: 29.1 (#287)
- Qwen2.5-Max: 41.3 (#137)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | 41.7% | — |
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1358 |

## Writing & Preference

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: 52.7 (#164)
- Qwen2.5-Max: 55.6 (#141)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Language | 44.9% | 56.3% |
| LMArena Text | — | 1367 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1339 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | — | 72.9% |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1364 |

## FAQ

### Is Gemini 2.0 Pro better than Qwen2.5-Max?

Qwen2.5-Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.1 to 38.6 on the Noometry Index.

### Is Gemini 2.0 Pro or Qwen2.5-Max better for coding?

Qwen2.5-Max scores higher on coding benchmarks: 41.2 versus 37.4 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do Gemini 2.0 Pro and Qwen2.5-Max share?

9 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 2.0 Pro has 14 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5-Max has 27.