# Gemma 2B vs Granite 3.0 2b Instruct

> Granite 3.0 2b Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 30.8 to 29.6 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/gemma-2b-vs-granite-3-0-2b-instruct
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 11

## Summary

- They share 11 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 2B scores higher in 1 category and Granite 3.0 2b Instruct in 6 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Granite 3.0 2b Instruct leads 29.6 to 24.0.

## Snapshot

| | Gemma 2B | Granite 3.0 2b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Google | IBM |
| Noometry Index | 29.6 | 30.8 |
| Rank | 307 | 286 |
| Context | — | — |
| Input $/M | — | — |
| Output $/M | — | — |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- Gemma 2B: 29.4 (#305)
- Granite 3.0 2b Instruct: 28.3 (#316)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | Granite 3.0 2b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1010 | 1090 |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 20.5% |
| HumanEval+ | 20.7% | — |
| MBPP+ | 34.1% | — |

## Reasoning

- Gemma 2B: 18.8 (#275)
- Granite 3.0 2b Instruct: 20.5 (#235)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | Granite 3.0 2b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 989 | 1073 |
| BIG-Bench Hard | 35.2% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 94.2 | — |
| HellaSwag | 71.4% | — |
| PIQA | 77.3% | — |
| WinoGrande | 65.4% | — |

## Math

- Gemma 2B: 30.0 (#239)
- Granite 3.0 2b Instruct: 32.2 (#217)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | Granite 3.0 2b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1009 | 1117 |
| GSM8K | 17.7% | — |

## Knowledge

- Gemma 2B: —
- Granite 3.0 2b Instruct: 29.0 (#241)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | Granite 3.0 2b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | — | 1064 |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | 42.1% | — |
| BoolQ | 69.4% | — |
| MMLU | 42.3% | — |
| TriviaQA | 53.2% | — |

## Multilingual

- Gemma 2B: 23.0 (#294)
- Granite 3.0 2b Instruct: 27.0 (#278)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | Granite 3.0 2b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 958 | 1033 |
| LMArena Chinese | 986 | 1070 |
| LMArena Russian | 937 | 1045 |

## Instruction Following

- Gemma 2B: 48.5 (#302)
- Granite 3.0 2b Instruct: 53.9 (#284)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | Granite 3.0 2b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 970 | 1056 |

## Long Context

- Gemma 2B: 29.9 (#291)
- Granite 3.0 2b Instruct: 32.5 (#268)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | Granite 3.0 2b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 981 | 1070 |

## Writing & Preference

- Gemma 2B: 24.0 (#308)
- Granite 3.0 2b Instruct: 29.6 (#292)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | Granite 3.0 2b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1002 | 1080 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 987 | 1046 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 945 | 1053 |

## FAQ

### Is Gemma 2B better than Granite 3.0 2b Instruct?

Granite 3.0 2b Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 30.8 to 29.6 on the Noometry Index.

### Is Gemma 2B or Granite 3.0 2b Instruct better for coding?

Gemma 2B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 29.4 versus 28.3 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do Gemma 2B and Granite 3.0 2b Instruct share?

11 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 2B has 23 scored results on Noometry and Granite 3.0 2b Instruct has 13.