# Gemini 2.0 Pro vs Qwen3.7 Max

> Qwen3.7 Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.4 to 38.6 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/gemini-2-0-pro-vs-qwen3-7-max
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 2

## Summary

- They share 2 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 2.0 Pro scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3.7 Max in 7 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Qwen3.7 Max leads 48.4 to 21.6.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is GPQA Diamond: 65.7% for Gemini 2.0 Pro and 90.9% for Qwen3.7 Max.

## Snapshot

| | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Qwen3.7 Max |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Google | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 38.6 | 51.4 |
| Rank | 171 | 35 |
| Context | — | 1M |
| Input $/M | — | $2.50 |
| Output $/M | — | $7.50 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |

## Coding

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: 37.4 (#182)
- Qwen3.7 Max: 50.2 (#43)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Qwen3.7 Max |
|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench Verified | — | 77.3% |
| Aider Polyglot | 35.6% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1515 |
| SciCode | — | 48.8% |
| LiveBench Coding | 63.5% | — |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1498 |
| ALE-Bench | — | 1,189 |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: —
- Qwen3.7 Max: 21.8 (#129)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Qwen3.7 Max |
|---|---|---|
| GBAEval | — | 0.4% |

## Reasoning

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: 21.6 (#194)
- Qwen3.7 Max: 48.4 (#36)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Qwen3.7 Max |
|---|---|---|
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 135.06 | 153.74 |
| SimpleBench | — | 70.4% |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 85.1% |
| CritPt | — | 13.4% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 19% |
| EnigmaEval | 0.7% | — |
| EBR-Bench | — | 9.5% |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 60.1% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1483 |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 32% |
| DTBench | — | 92.3% |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 68% | — |
| LMCA | — | 44% |
| LiveBench | 65.1% | — |

## Math

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: 37.1 (#101)
- Qwen3.7 Max: 62.3 (#26)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Qwen3.7 Max |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 64.6% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | — | 34.1% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 95.6% |
| ProofBench | — | 26% |
| LiveBench Math | 71% | — |
| LMArena Math | — | 1488 |
| MATH Level 5 | 83.5% | — |

## Knowledge

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: 36.5 (#156)
- Qwen3.7 Max: 61.7 (#24)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Qwen3.7 Max |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 65.7% | 90.9% |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 55.8% |
| Confabulations | 18.4% | — |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1488 |

## Multilingual

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: —
- Qwen3.7 Max: 57.1 (#13)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Qwen3.7 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1475 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1533 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1482 |

## Instruction Following

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: 75.6 (#57)
- Qwen3.7 Max: 76.9 (#34)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Qwen3.7 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 83.4% | — |
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1460 |

## Long Context

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: 29.1 (#287)
- Qwen3.7 Max: 45.4 (#34)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Qwen3.7 Max |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | 41.7% | — |
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1484 |

## Writing & Preference

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: 52.7 (#164)
- Qwen3.7 Max: 65.2 (#52)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Qwen3.7 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1476 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1450 |
| EQ-Bench 4 | — | 1110 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1482 |
| LiveBench Language | 44.9% | — |

## FAQ

### Is Gemini 2.0 Pro better than Qwen3.7 Max?

Qwen3.7 Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.4 to 38.6 on the Noometry Index.

### Is Gemini 2.0 Pro or Qwen3.7 Max better for coding?

Qwen3.7 Max scores higher on coding benchmarks: 50.2 versus 37.4 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do Gemini 2.0 Pro and Qwen3.7 Max share?

2 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 2.0 Pro has 14 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.7 Max has 33.