# Gemma 2B vs Hunyuan Standard 2025 02 10

> Hunyuan Standard 2025 02 10 is the stronger model overall, scoring 37.9 to 29.6 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/gemma-2b-vs-hunyuan-standard
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 11

## Summary

- They share 11 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 2B scores higher in 0 categories and Hunyuan Standard 2025 02 10 in 7 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Hunyuan Standard 2025 02 10 leads 47.2 to 24.0.
- Gemma 2B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | Gemma 2B | Hunyuan Standard 2025 02 10 |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Google | Tencent |
| Noometry Index | 29.6 | 37.9 |
| Rank | 307 | 193 |
| Context | — | — |
| Input $/M | — | — |
| Output $/M | — | — |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |

## Coding

- Gemma 2B: 29.4 (#305)
- Hunyuan Standard 2025 02 10: 37.1 (#197)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | Hunyuan Standard 2025 02 10 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1010 | 1270 |
| HumanEval+ | 20.7% | — |
| MBPP+ | 34.1% | — |

## Reasoning

- Gemma 2B: 18.8 (#275)
- Hunyuan Standard 2025 02 10: 25.0 (#154)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | Hunyuan Standard 2025 02 10 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 989 | 1264 |
| 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)
- Hunyuan Standard 2025 02 10: 35.6 (#179)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | Hunyuan Standard 2025 02 10 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1009 | 1274 |
| GSM8K | 17.7% | — |

## Knowledge

- Gemma 2B: —
- Hunyuan Standard 2025 02 10: 34.2 (#197)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | Hunyuan Standard 2025 02 10 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | — | 1248 |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | 42.1% | — |
| BoolQ | 69.4% | — |
| MMLU | 42.3% | — |
| TriviaQA | 53.2% | — |

## Multilingual

- Gemma 2B: 23.0 (#294)
- Hunyuan Standard 2025 02 10: 41.7 (#203)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | Hunyuan Standard 2025 02 10 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 958 | 1262 |
| LMArena Chinese | 986 | 1319 |
| LMArena Russian | 937 | 1258 |

## Instruction Following

- Gemma 2B: 48.5 (#302)
- Hunyuan Standard 2025 02 10: 65.5 (#219)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | Hunyuan Standard 2025 02 10 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 970 | 1245 |

## Long Context

- Gemma 2B: 29.9 (#291)
- Hunyuan Standard 2025 02 10: 39.5 (#173)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | Hunyuan Standard 2025 02 10 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 981 | 1301 |

## Writing & Preference

- Gemma 2B: 24.0 (#308)
- Hunyuan Standard 2025 02 10: 47.2 (#214)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | Hunyuan Standard 2025 02 10 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1002 | 1274 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 987 | 1242 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 945 | 1275 |

## FAQ

### Is Gemma 2B better than Hunyuan Standard 2025 02 10?

Hunyuan Standard 2025 02 10 is the stronger model overall, scoring 37.9 to 29.6 on the Noometry Index.

### Is Gemma 2B or Hunyuan Standard 2025 02 10 better for coding?

Hunyuan Standard 2025 02 10 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 37.1 versus 29.4 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do Gemma 2B and Hunyuan Standard 2025 02 10 share?

11 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 2B has 23 scored results on Noometry and Hunyuan Standard 2025 02 10 has 12.