# Gemma 2 9B vs Qwen2.5 7B Instruct

> Qwen2.5 7B Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 28.6 to 25.7 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/gemma-2-9b-vs-qwen2-5-7b-instruct
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 6

## Summary

- They share 6 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 2 9B scores higher in 1 category and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct in 5 categories; 5 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Qwen2.5 7B Instruct leads 48.8 to 32.3.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is GPQA Diamond: 27.5% for Gemma 2 9B and 35.5% for Qwen2.5 7B Instruct.

## Snapshot

| | Gemma 2 9B | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Google | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 25.7 | 28.6 |
| Rank | 334 | 314 |
| Context | — | 131K |
| Input $/M | — | $0.17 |
| Output $/M | — | $0.70 |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- Gemma 2 9B: 29.0 (#299)
- Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 35.9 (#204)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2 9B | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 34.7% | 37.6% |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 40.6% | 46.1% |
| LiveBench Coding | 22.5% | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1174 | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Gemma 2 9B: —
- Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 23.5 (#117)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2 9B | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| BALROG | — | 7.8% |

## Reasoning

- Gemma 2 9B: 15.3 (#306)
- Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 14.3 (#317)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2 9B | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 119.78 | 118.44 |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 0% |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 15.2% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1172 | — |
| DTBench | — | 47.7% |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 36.4% | — |
| LMCA | — | 6.4% |
| LiveBench | 28.7% | — |
| PIQA | 83.7% | — |

## Math

- Gemma 2 9B: 9.3 (#312)
- Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 11.8 (#300)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2 9B | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 0.6% | 2.5% |
| Omni-MATH | — | 29.4% |
| LiveBench Math | 19.8% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1183 | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 21% | — |
| GSM8K | 84.9% | — |

## Knowledge

- Gemma 2 9B: 9.7 (#300)
- Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 17.0 (#281)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2 9B | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 27.5% | 35.5% |
| MMLU | 72.1% | 72.9% |
| MMLU-Pro | — | 53.9% |
| GPQA (HELM) | — | 34.1% |
| LMArena Expert | 1147 | — |
| BoolQ | 85.7% | — |

## Multilingual

- Gemma 2 9B: 36.8 (#233)
- Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: —

| Benchmark | Gemma 2 9B | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1188 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1185 | — |
| LMArena French | 1189 | — |
| LMArena German | 1186 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1144 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1137 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1200 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1200 | — |

## Instruction Following

- Gemma 2 9B: 57.8 (#264)
- Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 63.4 (#226)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2 9B | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 52.6% | — |
| IFEval | — | 74.1% |
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1178 | — |

## Long Context

- Gemma 2 9B: 36.3 (#228)
- Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: —

| Benchmark | Gemma 2 9B | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1197 | — |

## Writing & Preference

- Gemma 2 9B: 32.3 (#276)
- Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 48.8 (#194)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2 9B | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1207 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1206 | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 841 | — |
| WildBench | — | 73.1% |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1193 | — |
| LiveBench Language | 25.5% | — |

## FAQ

### Is Gemma 2 9B better than Qwen2.5 7B Instruct?

Qwen2.5 7B Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 28.6 to 25.7 on the Noometry Index.

### Is Gemma 2 9B or Qwen2.5 7B Instruct better for coding?

Qwen2.5 7B Instruct scores higher on coding benchmarks: 35.9 versus 29.0 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do Gemma 2 9B and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct share?

6 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 2 9B has 35 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct has 15.