# Gemma 2 2b IT vs Qwen3 14B

> Qwen3 14B is the stronger model overall, scoring 35.0 to 32.5 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/gemma-2-2b-it-vs-qwen3-14b
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 0

## Summary

- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen3 14B leads 39.2 to 29.3.

## Snapshot

| | Gemma 2 2b IT | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Google | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 32.5 | 35.0 |
| Rank | 244 | 222 |
| Context | — | 131K |
| Input $/M | — | $0.35 |
| Output $/M | — | $1.40 |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- Gemma 2 2b IT: 31.8 (#268)
- Qwen3 14B: 36.7 (#191)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2 2b IT | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | — | 31.6% |
| LMArena Coding | 1112 | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Gemma 2 2b IT: —
- Qwen3 14B: 29.4 (#78)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2 2b IT | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 41% |

## Reasoning

- Gemma 2 2b IT: 20.5 (#219)
- Qwen3 14B: 18.1 (#272)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2 2b IT | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 49.1% |
| CritPt | — | 0% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 4% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1113 | — |
| DTBench | — | 64% |
| LMCA | — | 18.2% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 138.23 |

## Math

- Gemma 2 2b IT: 30.1 (#212)
- Qwen3 14B: 37.0 (#102)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2 2b IT | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 66.4% |
| LMArena Math | 1135 | — |

## Knowledge

- Gemma 2 2b IT: 29.3 (#229)
- Qwen3 14B: 39.2 (#124)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2 2b IT | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 63.8% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 5.4% |
| LMArena Expert | 1096 | — |

## Multilingual

- Gemma 2 2b IT: 32.5 (#252)
- Qwen3 14B: —

| Benchmark | Gemma 2 2b IT | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1121 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1132 | — |
| LMArena French | 1156 | — |
| LMArena German | 1114 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1083 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1055 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1118 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1140 | — |

## Instruction Following

- Gemma 2 2b IT: 58.1 (#258)
- Qwen3 14B: —

| Benchmark | Gemma 2 2b IT | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1118 | — |

## Long Context

- Gemma 2 2b IT: 34.2 (#245)
- Qwen3 14B: 38.0 (#201)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2 2b IT | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 62.5% |
| LMArena Longer Query | 1130 | — |

## Writing & Preference

- Gemma 2 2b IT: 36.6 (#258)
- Qwen3 14B: —

| Benchmark | Gemma 2 2b IT | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1156 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1147 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1118 | — |

## FAQ

### Is Gemma 2 2b IT better than Qwen3 14B?

Qwen3 14B is the stronger model overall, scoring 35.0 to 32.5 on the Noometry Index.

### Is Gemma 2 2b IT or Qwen3 14B better for coding?

Qwen3 14B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 36.7 versus 31.8 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do Gemma 2 2b IT and Qwen3 14B share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 2 2b IT has 17 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3 14B has 12.