# Gemma 1.1 2b IT vs Qwen3.5 27B

> Qwen3.5 27B is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.9 to 29.3 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/gemma-1-1-2b-it-vs-qwen3-5-27b
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 14

## Summary

- They share 14 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 1.1 2b IT scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3.5 27B in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Qwen3.5 27B leads 59.3 to 25.1.

## Snapshot

| | Gemma 1.1 2b IT | Qwen3.5 27B |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Google | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 29.3 | 41.9 |
| Rank | 313 | 127 |
| Context | — | 262K |
| Input $/M | — | $0.30 |
| Output $/M | — | $2.40 |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 30.1 (#299)
- Qwen3.5 27B: 38.9 (#168)

| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 2b IT | Qwen3.5 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1034 | 1427 |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1358 |
| WeirdML | — | 39.5% |
| ALE-Bench | — | 349.45 |
| HumanEval+ | 17.7% | — |
| MBPP+ | 23.3% | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Gemma 1.1 2b IT: —
- Qwen3.5 27B: —

| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 2b IT | Qwen3.5 27B |
|---|---|---|
| Vending-Bench 2 | — | 201.98 |

## Reasoning

- Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 19.1 (#270)
- Qwen3.5 27B: 27.5 (#117)

| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 2b IT | Qwen3.5 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1005 | 1414 |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 47.9% |
| Thematic Generalization | — | 45.5% |
| DTBench | — | 82.4% |
| LMCA | — | 34% |

## Math

- Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 30.8 (#232)
- Qwen3.5 27B: 38.8 (#127)

| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 2b IT | Qwen3.5 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1047 | 1429 |
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | — | 56.7% |

## Knowledge

- Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 26.5 (#258)
- Qwen3.5 27B: 38.0 (#150)

| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 2b IT | Qwen3.5 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 970 | 1428 |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 12.1% |

## Multimodal

- Gemma 1.1 2b IT: —
- Qwen3.5 27B: 39.4 (#59)

| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 2b IT | Qwen3.5 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1241 |

## Multilingual

- Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 24.6 (#289)
- Qwen3.5 27B: 50.8 (#115)

| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 2b IT | Qwen3.5 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 988 | 1390 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1012 | 1478 |
| LMArena German | 944 | 1393 |
| LMArena Korean | 899 | 1358 |
| LMArena Russian | 990 | 1390 |
| LMArena French | — | 1410 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1345 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1407 |

## Instruction Following

- Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 49.9 (#299)
- Qwen3.5 27B: 73.5 (#119)

| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 2b IT | Qwen3.5 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 992 | 1393 |

## Long Context

- Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 30.6 (#286)
- Qwen3.5 27B: 43.1 (#106)

| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 2b IT | Qwen3.5 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1003 | 1413 |

## Writing & Preference

- Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 25.1 (#306)
- Qwen3.5 27B: 59.3 (#111)

| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 2b IT | Qwen3.5 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1022 | 1409 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 998 | 1362 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 959 | 1410 |

## FAQ

### Is Gemma 1.1 2b IT better than Qwen3.5 27B?

Qwen3.5 27B is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.9 to 29.3 on the Noometry Index.

### Is Gemma 1.1 2b IT or Qwen3.5 27B better for coding?

Qwen3.5 27B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 38.9 versus 30.1 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do Gemma 1.1 2b IT and Qwen3.5 27B share?

14 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 1.1 2b IT has 16 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.5 27B has 28.