# Gemma 2B vs GPT-5.2

> GPT-5.2 is the stronger model overall, scoring 54.1 to 29.6 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/gemma-2b-vs-gpt-5-2
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 12

## Summary

- They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 2B scores higher in 0 categories and GPT-5.2 in 7 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where GPT-5.2 leads 66.8 to 24.0.
- Gemma 2B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | Gemma 2B | GPT-5.2 |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Google | OpenAI |
| Noometry Index | 29.6 | 54.1 |
| Rank | 307 | 34 |
| Context | — | 400K |
| Input $/M | — | $1.75 |
| Output $/M | — | $14 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |

## Coding

- Gemma 2B: 29.4 (#305)
- GPT-5.2: 51.6 (#37)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | GPT-5.2 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1010 | 1447 |
| SWE-bench Verified | — | 73.8% |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | — | 72.8% |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1416 |
| SWE-bench Multilingual | — | 66.7% |
| GSO | — | 27.4% |
| WeirdML | — | 72.2% |
| ALE-Bench | — | 1,294 |
| AlgoTune | — | 2.05 |
| HumanEval+ | 20.7% | — |
| MBPP+ | 34.1% | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Gemma 2B: —
- GPT-5.2: 40.2 (#24)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | GPT-5.2 |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | — | 64.9% |
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 55.9% |
| GDPval | — | 49.7% |
| Remote Labor Index | — | 2.5% |
| τ²-bench Airline | — | 83% |
| τ²-bench Banking | — | 32.2% |
| τ²-bench Retail | — | 81.6% |
| τ²-bench Telecom | — | 89.7% |
| DeepResearch Bench | — | 41.1% |
| LMArena Search | — | 1207 |
| METR Time Horizons | — | 75.3% |
| Vending-Bench 2 | — | 3,591 |

## Reasoning

- Gemma 2B: 18.8 (#275)
- GPT-5.2: 50.2 (#35)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | GPT-5.2 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 989 | 1445 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 94.2 | 153.45 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | — | 52.9% |
| SimpleBench | — | 45.8% |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 73.3% |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 83.6% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | — | 86.2% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 49% |
| EnigmaEval | — | 10.4% |
| EBR-Bench | — | 23% |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 23% |
| DTBench | — | 90.9% |
| LMCA | — | 43.9% |
| BIG-Bench Hard | 35.2% | — |
| ForecastBench | — | 60.1 |
| HellaSwag | 71.4% | — |
| PIQA | 77.3% | — |
| WinoGrande | 65.4% | — |

## Math

- Gemma 2B: 30.0 (#239)
- GPT-5.2: 60.0 (#38)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | GPT-5.2 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1009 | 1440 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 67.4% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | — | 31.7% |
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | — | 72% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 96.1% |
| ProofBench | — | 15% |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 40.7% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | — | 18.8% |
| GSM8K | 17.7% | — |

## Knowledge

- Gemma 2B: —
- GPT-5.2: 59.3 (#32)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | GPT-5.2 |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 91.4% |
| Humanity's Last Exam | — | 27.8% |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 37.1% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 8.4% |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1445 |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | 42.1% | — |
| BoolQ | 69.4% | — |
| MMLU | 42.3% | — |
| TriviaQA | 53.2% | — |

## Multimodal

- Gemma 2B: —
- GPT-5.2: 51.3 (#7)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | GPT-5.2 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1268 |
| VPCT | — | 84% |
| Furniture Assembly | — | 38.3% |
| LMArena Document | — | 1405 |

## Multilingual

- Gemma 2B: 23.0 (#294)
- GPT-5.2: 53.4 (#67)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | GPT-5.2 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 958 | 1425 |
| LMArena Chinese | 986 | 1460 |
| LMArena Russian | 937 | 1440 |
| LMArena French | — | 1455 |
| LMArena German | — | 1448 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1420 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1392 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1433 |

## Instruction Following

- Gemma 2B: 48.5 (#302)
- GPT-5.2: 74.7 (#89)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | GPT-5.2 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 970 | 1417 |

## Long Context

- Gemma 2B: 29.9 (#291)
- GPT-5.2: 44.0 (#78)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | GPT-5.2 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 981 | 1428 |
| CL-bench | — | 18.2% |

## Writing & Preference

- Gemma 2B: 24.0 (#308)
- GPT-5.2: 66.8 (#32)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | GPT-5.2 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1002 | 1439 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 987 | 1401 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 945 | 1458 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 1703 |

## FAQ

### Is Gemma 2B better than GPT-5.2?

GPT-5.2 is the stronger model overall, scoring 54.1 to 29.6 on the Noometry Index.

### Is Gemma 2B or GPT-5.2 better for coding?

GPT-5.2 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 51.6 versus 29.4 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do Gemma 2B and GPT-5.2 share?

12 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 2B has 23 scored results on Noometry and GPT-5.2 has 67.