# Gemini 2.0 Pro vs Qwen3 32B

> Gemini 2.0 Pro and Qwen3 32B score almost the same on the Noometry Index (38.6 vs 38.8), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/gemini-2-0-pro-vs-qwen3-32b
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 4

## Summary

- They share 4 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 2.0 Pro scores higher in 3 categories and Qwen3 32B in 4 categories; 4 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in long context, where Qwen3 32B leads 43.7 to 29.1.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is Fiction.LiveBench: 41.7% for Gemini 2.0 Pro and 74.2% for Qwen3 32B.
- Qwen3 32B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Google | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 38.6 | 38.8 |
| Rank | 171 | 166 |
| Context | — | 131K |
| Input $/M | — | $0.70 |
| Output $/M | — | $2.80 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |

## Coding

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: 37.4 (#182)
- Qwen3 32B: 37.3 (#184)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| Aider Polyglot | 35.6% | 40% |
| SciCode | — | 35.4% |
| LiveBench Coding | 63.5% | — |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1358 |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: —
- Qwen3 32B: 32.3 (#58)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 48.7% |

## Reasoning

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: 21.6 (#194)
- Qwen3 32B: 19.6 (#233)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 135.06 | 138.51 |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 54.9% |
| CritPt | — | 0.3% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 5% |
| EnigmaEval | 0.7% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 60.1% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1335 |
| DTBench | — | 67.5% |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 68% | — |
| LMCA | — | 17.3% |
| LiveBench | 65.1% | — |

## Math

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: 37.1 (#101)
- Qwen3 32B: 37.9 (#89)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 66.9% |
| LiveBench Math | 71% | — |
| LMArena Math | — | 1399 |
| MATH Level 5 | 83.5% | — |

## Knowledge

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: 36.5 (#156)
- Qwen3 32B: 40.0 (#112)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 65.7% | 65.7% |
| Confabulations | 18.4% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 5.9% |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1362 |

## Multilingual

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: —
- Qwen3 32B: 45.8 (#162)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1317 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1357 |
| LMArena German | — | 1341 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1311 |

## Instruction Following

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: 75.6 (#57)
- Qwen3 32B: 69.1 (#174)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 83.4% | — |
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1305 |

## Long Context

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: 29.1 (#287)
- Qwen3 32B: 43.7 (#83)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | 41.7% | 74.2% |
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1327 |

## Writing & Preference

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: 52.7 (#164)
- Qwen3 32B: 53.1 (#158)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1340 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1297 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1331 |
| LiveBench Language | 44.9% | — |

## FAQ

### Is Gemini 2.0 Pro better than Qwen3 32B?

Gemini 2.0 Pro and Qwen3 32B score almost the same on the Noometry Index (38.6 vs 38.8), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.

### Is Gemini 2.0 Pro or Qwen3 32B better for coding?

They score almost the same on coding (37.4 vs 37.3); test both on your own repository before choosing.

### How many benchmarks do Gemini 2.0 Pro and Qwen3 32B share?

4 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 2.0 Pro has 14 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3 32B has 26.