# Gemma 2 9B vs Qwen3 14B

> Qwen3 14B is the stronger model overall, scoring 35.0 to 25.7 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/gemma-2-9b-vs-qwen3-14b
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 3

## Summary

- They share 3 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 2 9B scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3 14B in 5 categories; 5 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen3 14B leads 39.2 to 9.7.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 0.6% for Gemma 2 9B and 66.4% for Qwen3 14B.

## Snapshot

| | Gemma 2 9B | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Google | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 25.7 | 35.0 |
| Rank | 334 | 222 |
| Context | — | 131K |
| Input $/M | — | $0.35 |
| Output $/M | — | $1.40 |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- Gemma 2 9B: 29.0 (#299)
- Qwen3 14B: 36.7 (#191)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2 9B | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | — | 31.6% |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 34.7% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 22.5% | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1174 | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 40.6% | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Gemma 2 9B: —
- Qwen3 14B: 29.4 (#78)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2 9B | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 41% |

## Reasoning

- Gemma 2 9B: 15.3 (#306)
- Qwen3 14B: 18.1 (#272)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2 9B | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 119.78 | 138.23 |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 49.1% |
| CritPt | — | 0% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 4% |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 15.2% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1172 | — |
| DTBench | — | 64% |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 36.4% | — |
| LMCA | — | 18.2% |
| LiveBench | 28.7% | — |
| PIQA | 83.7% | — |

## Math

- Gemma 2 9B: 9.3 (#312)
- Qwen3 14B: 37.0 (#102)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2 9B | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 0.6% | 66.4% |
| LiveBench Math | 19.8% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1183 | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 21% | — |
| GSM8K | 84.9% | — |

## Knowledge

- Gemma 2 9B: 9.7 (#300)
- Qwen3 14B: 39.2 (#124)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2 9B | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 27.5% | 63.8% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 5.4% |
| LMArena Expert | 1147 | — |
| BoolQ | 85.7% | — |
| MMLU | 72.1% | — |

## Multilingual

- Gemma 2 9B: 36.8 (#233)
- Qwen3 14B: —

| Benchmark | Gemma 2 9B | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| 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)
- Qwen3 14B: —

| Benchmark | Gemma 2 9B | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 52.6% | — |
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1178 | — |

## Long Context

- Gemma 2 9B: 36.3 (#228)
- Qwen3 14B: 38.0 (#201)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2 9B | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 62.5% |
| LMArena Longer Query | 1197 | — |

## Writing & Preference

- Gemma 2 9B: 32.3 (#276)
- Qwen3 14B: —

| Benchmark | Gemma 2 9B | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1207 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1206 | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 841 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1193 | — |
| LiveBench Language | 25.5% | — |

## FAQ

### Is Gemma 2 9B better than Qwen3 14B?

Qwen3 14B is the stronger model overall, scoring 35.0 to 25.7 on the Noometry Index.

### Is Gemma 2 9B or Qwen3 14B better for coding?

Qwen3 14B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 36.7 versus 29.0 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do Gemma 2 9B and Qwen3 14B share?

3 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 2 9B has 35 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3 14B has 12.