# Gemma 2B vs Qwen3.6 27B

> Qwen3.6 27B is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.2 to 29.6 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/gemma-2b-vs-qwen3-6-27b
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 1

## Summary

- They share 1 benchmark with published results for both. Gemma 2B scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3.6 27B in 4 categories; 4 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Qwen3.6 27B leads 50.3 to 24.0.

## Snapshot

| | Gemma 2B | Qwen3.6 27B |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Google | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 29.6 | 42.2 |
| Rank | 307 | 117 |
| Context | — | 262K |
| Input $/M | — | $0.60 |
| Output $/M | — | $3.60 |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- Gemma 2B: 29.4 (#305)
- Qwen3.6 27B: 39.1 (#163)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | Qwen3.6 27B |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | — | 37.3% |
| LMArena Coding | 1010 | — |
| HumanEval+ | 20.7% | — |
| MBPP+ | 34.1% | — |

## Reasoning

- Gemma 2B: 18.8 (#275)
- Qwen3.6 27B: 25.0 (#153)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | Qwen3.6 27B |
|---|---|---|
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 94.2 | 146.5 |
| CritPt | — | 0.9% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 22% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 989 | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 7% |
| DTBench | — | 78.1% |
| LMCA | — | 34.5% |
| BIG-Bench Hard | 35.2% | — |
| HellaSwag | 71.4% | — |
| PIQA | 77.3% | — |
| WinoGrande | 65.4% | — |

## Math

- Gemma 2B: 30.0 (#239)
- Qwen3.6 27B: 48.5 (#62)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | Qwen3.6 27B |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 35.1% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 91.1% |
| LMArena Math | 1009 | — |
| GSM8K | 17.7% | — |

## Knowledge

- Gemma 2B: —
- Qwen3.6 27B: 52.4 (#63)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | Qwen3.6 27B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 85.9% |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | 42.1% | — |
| BoolQ | 69.4% | — |
| MMLU | 42.3% | — |
| TriviaQA | 53.2% | — |

## Multilingual

- Gemma 2B: 23.0 (#294)
- Qwen3.6 27B: —

| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | Qwen3.6 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 958 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 986 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 937 | — |

## Instruction Following

- Gemma 2B: 48.5 (#302)
- Qwen3.6 27B: —

| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | Qwen3.6 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 970 | — |

## Long Context

- Gemma 2B: 29.9 (#291)
- Qwen3.6 27B: —

| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | Qwen3.6 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 981 | — |

## Writing & Preference

- Gemma 2B: 24.0 (#308)
- Qwen3.6 27B: 50.3 (#181)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | Qwen3.6 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1002 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 987 | — |
| EQ-Bench 4 | — | 1026 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 945 | — |

## FAQ

### Is Gemma 2B better than Qwen3.6 27B?

Qwen3.6 27B is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.2 to 29.6 on the Noometry Index.

### Is Gemma 2B or Qwen3.6 27B better for coding?

Qwen3.6 27B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 39.1 versus 29.4 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do Gemma 2B and Qwen3.6 27B share?

1 benchmark has published results for both models. Gemma 2B has 23 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.6 27B has 11.