# Gemma 2B vs Qwen Max

> Qwen Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 34.7 to 29.6 on the Noometry Index.

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

## Summary

- They share 11 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 2B scores higher in 1 category and Qwen Max in 6 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Qwen Max leads 47.8 to 24.0.
- Gemma 2B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | Gemma 2B | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Google | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 29.6 | 34.7 |
| Rank | 307 | 230 |
| Context | — | 33K |
| Input $/M | — | $1.60 |
| Output $/M | — | $6.40 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |

## Coding

- Gemma 2B: 29.4 (#305)
- Qwen Max: 30.7 (#292)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1010 | 1288 |
| Aider Polyglot | — | 21.8% |
| HumanEval+ | 20.7% | — |
| MBPP+ | 34.1% | — |

## Reasoning

- Gemma 2B: 18.8 (#275)
- Qwen Max: 25.1 (#151)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 989 | 1269 |
| 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)
- Qwen Max: 22.3 (#276)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1009 | 1275 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 16.1% |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 67.2% |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 1% |
| GSM8K | 17.7% | — |

## Knowledge

- Gemma 2B: —
- Qwen Max: 30.3 (#228)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 56.1% |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1248 |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | 42.1% | — |
| BoolQ | 69.4% | — |
| MMLU | 42.3% | — |
| TriviaQA | 53.2% | — |

## Multilingual

- Gemma 2B: 23.0 (#294)
- Qwen Max: 41.8 (#202)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 958 | 1263 |
| LMArena Chinese | 986 | 1254 |
| LMArena Russian | 937 | 1274 |
| LMArena French | — | 1330 |
| LMArena German | — | 1254 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1205 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1142 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1290 |

## Instruction Following

- Gemma 2B: 48.5 (#302)
- Qwen Max: 66.5 (#208)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 970 | 1262 |

## Long Context

- Gemma 2B: 29.9 (#291)
- Qwen Max: 39.4 (#180)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 981 | 1288 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 66.7% |

## Writing & Preference

- Gemma 2B: 24.0 (#308)
- Qwen Max: 47.8 (#205)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1002 | 1282 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 987 | 1248 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 945 | 1277 |

## FAQ

### Is Gemma 2B better than Qwen Max?

Qwen Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 34.7 to 29.6 on the Noometry Index.

### Is Gemma 2B or Qwen Max better for coding?

Qwen Max scores higher on coding benchmarks: 30.7 versus 29.4 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do Gemma 2B and Qwen Max share?

11 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 2B has 23 scored results on Noometry and Qwen Max has 23.