# Gemma 2 2b IT vs Qwen3.8 27B

> Qwen3.8 27B is the stronger model overall, scoring 46.0 to 33.1 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/gemma-2-2b-it-vs-qwen3-8-27b
- Last updated: 2026-10-12
- Shared benchmarks: 17

## Summary

- They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 2 2b IT scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3.8 27B in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Qwen3.8 27B leads 65.8 to 36.5.

## Snapshot

| | Gemma 2 2b IT | Qwen3.8 27B |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Google | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 33.1 | 46.0 |
| Rank | 248 | 68 |
| Context | — | 262K |
| Input $/M | — | $0.04 |
| Output $/M | — | $2.30 |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- Gemma 2 2b IT: 32.3 (#273)
- Qwen3.8 27B: 50.5 (#44)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2 2b IT | Qwen3.8 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1112 | 1482 |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1593 |
| SciCode | — | 46.6% |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Gemma 2 2b IT: —
- Qwen3.8 27B: 32.9 (#57)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2 2b IT | Qwen3.8 27B |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | — | 47.5% |

## Reasoning

- Gemma 2 2b IT: 21.4 (#224)
- Qwen3.8 27B: 41.0 (#54)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2 2b IT | Qwen3.8 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1113 | 1460 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | — | 42.4% |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 54.5% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | — | 87.5% |
| CritPt | — | 5.4% |
| DTBench | — | 88% |
| LMCA | — | 41.4% |
| Surface Evolver Bench | — | 45% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 149.38 |

## Math

- Gemma 2 2b IT: 32.6 (#212)
- Qwen3.8 27B: 37.1 (#161)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2 2b IT | Qwen3.8 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1135 | 1456 |
| ProofBench | — | 16% |

## Knowledge

- Gemma 2 2b IT: 29.9 (#231)
- Qwen3.8 27B: 41.6 (#109)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2 2b IT | Qwen3.8 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1096 | 1482 |

## Multimodal

- Gemma 2 2b IT: —
- Qwen3.8 27B: 41.3 (#37)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2 2b IT | Qwen3.8 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1271 |

## Multilingual

- Gemma 2 2b IT: 32.3 (#257)
- Qwen3.8 27B: 53.7 (#60)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2 2b IT | Qwen3.8 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1121 | 1430 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1132 | 1504 |
| LMArena French | 1157 | 1465 |
| LMArena German | 1114 | 1438 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1083 | 1384 |
| LMArena Korean | 1055 | 1393 |
| LMArena Russian | 1118 | 1415 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1140 | 1448 |

## Instruction Following

- Gemma 2 2b IT: 57.8 (#263)
- Qwen3.8 27B: 75.8 (#53)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2 2b IT | Qwen3.8 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1118 | 1439 |

## Long Context

- Gemma 2 2b IT: 34.3 (#250)
- Qwen3.8 27B: 44.3 (#70)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2 2b IT | Qwen3.8 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1130 | 1450 |

## Writing & Preference

- Gemma 2 2b IT: 36.5 (#263)
- Qwen3.8 27B: 65.8 (#43)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2 2b IT | Qwen3.8 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1156 | 1441 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1147 | 1384 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1118 | 1441 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 1671 |

## FAQ

### Is Gemma 2 2b IT better than Qwen3.8 27B?

Qwen3.8 27B is the stronger model overall, scoring 46.0 to 33.1 on the Noometry Index.

### Is Gemma 2 2b IT or Qwen3.8 27B better for coding?

Qwen3.8 27B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 50.5 versus 32.3 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do Gemma 2 2b IT and Qwen3.8 27B share?

17 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 2 2b IT has 17 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.8 27B has 31.