# Gemma 2B vs Qwen2.5-Coder-32B

> Qwen2.5-Coder-32B is the stronger model overall, scoring 33.4 to 29.6 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/gemma-2b-vs-qwen2-5-coder-32b
- Last updated: 2026-10-11
- Shared benchmarks: 19

## Summary

- They share 19 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 2B scores higher in 1 category and Qwen2.5-Coder-32B in 6 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Qwen2.5-Coder-32B leads 41.6 to 24.0.

## Snapshot

| | Gemma 2B | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Google | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 29.6 | 33.4 |
| Rank | 307 | 245 |
| Context | — | 33K |
| Input $/M | — | $0.66 |
| Output $/M | — | $1 |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- Gemma 2B: 29.4 (#305)
- Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 22.6 (#333)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1010 | 1276 |
| HumanEval+ | 20.7% | 87.2% |
| MBPP+ | 34.1% | 77% |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | — | 9% |
| Aider Polyglot | — | 16.4% |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 49% |
| LiveBench Coding | — | 56.9% |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 58% |

## Reasoning

- Gemma 2B: 18.8 (#275)
- Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 21.2 (#225)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 989 | 1251 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 94.2 | 119.49 |
| HellaSwag | 71.4% | 83% |
| WinoGrande | 65.4% | 80.8% |
| LiveBench Reasoning | — | 42.1% |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | — | 49.9% |
| BIG-Bench Hard | 35.2% | — |
| LiveBench | — | 46.2% |
| PIQA | 77.3% | — |

## Math

- Gemma 2B: 30.0 (#239)
- Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 33.3 (#204)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1009 | 1251 |
| GSM8K | 17.7% | 93% |
| LiveBench Math | — | 46.6% |

## Knowledge

- Gemma 2B: —
- Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 33.4 (#203)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | 42.1% | 70.5% |
| MMLU | 42.3% | 79.1% |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1221 |
| BoolQ | 69.4% | — |
| TriviaQA | 53.2% | — |

## Multilingual

- Gemma 2B: 23.0 (#294)
- Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 37.8 (#235)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 958 | 1205 |
| LMArena Chinese | 986 | 1222 |
| LMArena Russian | 937 | 1228 |

## Instruction Following

- Gemma 2B: 48.5 (#302)
- Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 61.4 (#245)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 970 | 1223 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | — | 58.7% |

## Long Context

- Gemma 2B: 29.9 (#291)
- Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 38.0 (#208)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 981 | 1251 |

## Writing & Preference

- Gemma 2B: 24.0 (#308)
- Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 41.6 (#240)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1002 | 1230 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 987 | 1174 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 945 | 1222 |
| LiveBench Language | — | 23.3% |

## FAQ

### Is Gemma 2B better than Qwen2.5-Coder-32B?

Qwen2.5-Coder-32B is the stronger model overall, scoring 33.4 to 29.6 on the Noometry Index.

### Is Gemma 2B or Qwen2.5-Coder-32B better for coding?

Gemma 2B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 29.4 versus 22.6 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do Gemma 2B and Qwen2.5-Coder-32B share?

19 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 2B has 23 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5-Coder-32B has 31.