# Gemma 2 9B vs Qwen2.5-Max

> Qwen2.5-Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.1 to 25.7 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/gemma-2-9b-vs-qwen2-5-max
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 25

## Summary

- They share 25 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 2 9B scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen2.5-Max in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen2.5-Max leads 34.8 to 9.7.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is LiveBench Coding: 22.5% for Gemma 2 9B and 64.4% for Qwen2.5-Max.
- Gemma 2 9B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | Gemma 2 9B | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Google | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 25.7 | 40.1 |
| Rank | 334 | 142 |
| Context | — | — |
| Input $/M | — | — |
| Output $/M | — | — |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |

## Coding

- Gemma 2 9B: 29.0 (#299)
- Qwen2.5-Max: 41.2 (#118)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2 9B | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Coding | 22.5% | 64.4% |
| LMArena Coding | 1174 | 1359 |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 34.7% | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 40.6% | — |

## Reasoning

- Gemma 2 9B: 15.3 (#306)
- Qwen2.5-Max: 24.6 (#144)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2 9B | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Reasoning | 15.2% | 51.4% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1172 | 1360 |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 36.4% | 67.9% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 119.78 | 132.54 |
| LiveBench | 28.7% | 62.3% |
| PIQA | 83.7% | — |

## Math

- Gemma 2 9B: 9.3 (#312)
- Qwen2.5-Max: 34.3 (#162)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2 9B | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Math | 19.8% | 58.4% |
| LMArena Math | 1183 | 1369 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 0.6% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 21% | — |
| GSM8K | 84.9% | — |

## Knowledge

- Gemma 2 9B: 9.7 (#300)
- Qwen2.5-Max: 34.8 (#181)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2 9B | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1147 | 1337 |
| GPQA Diamond | 27.5% | — |
| Confabulations | — | 21.8% |
| BoolQ | 85.7% | — |
| MMLU | 72.1% | — |

## Multilingual

- Gemma 2 9B: 36.8 (#233)
- Qwen2.5-Max: 48.3 (#140)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2 9B | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1188 | 1352 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1185 | 1382 |
| LMArena French | 1189 | 1396 |
| LMArena German | 1186 | 1350 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1144 | 1299 |
| LMArena Korean | 1137 | 1304 |
| LMArena Russian | 1200 | 1353 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1200 | 1377 |

## Instruction Following

- Gemma 2 9B: 57.8 (#264)
- Qwen2.5-Max: 71.5 (#147)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2 9B | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 52.6% | 75.3% |
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1178 | 1335 |

## Long Context

- Gemma 2 9B: 36.3 (#228)
- Qwen2.5-Max: 41.3 (#137)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2 9B | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1197 | 1358 |

## Writing & Preference

- Gemma 2 9B: 32.3 (#276)
- Qwen2.5-Max: 55.6 (#141)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2 9B | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1207 | 1367 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1206 | 1339 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1193 | 1364 |
| LiveBench Language | 25.5% | 56.3% |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | — | 72.9% |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 841 | — |

## FAQ

### Is Gemma 2 9B better than Qwen2.5-Max?

Qwen2.5-Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.1 to 25.7 on the Noometry Index.

### Is Gemma 2 9B or Qwen2.5-Max better for coding?

Qwen2.5-Max scores higher on coding benchmarks: 41.2 versus 29.0 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do Gemma 2 9B and Qwen2.5-Max share?

25 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 2 9B has 35 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5-Max has 27.