# Gemma 3 4B vs Qwen1.5-32B

> Qwen1.5-32B is the stronger model overall, scoring 30.5 to 28.1 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/gemma-3-4b-vs-qwen1-5-32b
- Last updated: 2026-10-12
- Shared benchmarks: 13

## Summary

- They share 13 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 3 4B scores higher in 5 categories and Qwen1.5-32B in 3 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Qwen1.5-32B leads 33.0 to 16.8.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is GPQA Diamond: 23.2% for Gemma 3 4B and 30.7% for Qwen1.5-32B.

## Snapshot

| | Gemma 3 4B | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Google | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 28.1 | 30.5 |
| Rank | 326 | 293 |
| Context | 131K | — |
| Input $/M | $0.04 | — |
| Output $/M | $0.08 | — |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- Gemma 3 4B: 35.9 (#215)
- Qwen1.5-32B: 31.7 (#282)

| Benchmark | Gemma 3 4B | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1230 | 1155 |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 32.3% |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 42% |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Gemma 3 4B: 20.9 (#142)
- Qwen1.5-32B: —

| Benchmark | Gemma 3 4B | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 19.6% | — |

## Reasoning

- Gemma 3 4B: 13.2 (#335)
- Qwen1.5-32B: 21.8 (#212)

| Benchmark | Gemma 3 4B | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1253 | 1130 |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 25.2% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 0% | — |
| DTBench | 50.9% | — |
| LMCA | 2.8% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 116.02 | — |

## Math

- Gemma 3 4B: 16.8 (#292)
- Qwen1.5-32B: 33.0 (#207)

| Benchmark | Gemma 3 4B | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1239 | 1155 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 7.5% | — |

## Knowledge

- Gemma 3 4B: 11.8 (#299)
- Qwen1.5-32B: 13.5 (#296)

| Benchmark | Gemma 3 4B | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 23.2% | 30.7% |
| LMArena Expert | 1223 | 1126 |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 6.4% | — |
| MMLU | — | 74.4% |

## Multilingual

- Gemma 3 4B: 42.5 (#194)
- Qwen1.5-32B: 31.4 (#259)

| Benchmark | Gemma 3 4B | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1273 | 1106 |
| LMArena German | 1281 | 1058 |
| LMArena Russian | 1294 | 1073 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1177 |
| LMArena French | — | 1101 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1027 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1008 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1089 |

## Instruction Following

- Gemma 3 4B: 65.2 (#225)
- Qwen1.5-32B: 57.7 (#265)

| Benchmark | Gemma 3 4B | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1239 | 1116 |

## Long Context

- Gemma 3 4B: 38.7 (#194)
- Qwen1.5-32B: 34.7 (#246)

| Benchmark | Gemma 3 4B | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1273 | 1146 |

## Writing & Preference

- Gemma 3 4B: 42.0 (#239)
- Qwen1.5-32B: 34.2 (#271)

| Benchmark | Gemma 3 4B | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1291 | 1137 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1271 | 1083 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1255 | 1140 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1068 | — |

## FAQ

### Is Gemma 3 4B better than Qwen1.5-32B?

Qwen1.5-32B is the stronger model overall, scoring 30.5 to 28.1 on the Noometry Index.

### Is Gemma 3 4B or Qwen1.5-32B better for coding?

Gemma 3 4B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 35.9 versus 31.7 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do Gemma 3 4B and Qwen1.5-32B share?

13 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 3 4B has 22 scored results on Noometry and Qwen1.5-32B has 21.