# Gemma 3n E4b IT vs Qwen2.5-Max

> Qwen2.5-Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.7 to 37.3 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/gemma-3n-e4b-it-vs-qwen2-5-max
- Last updated: 2026-10-12
- Shared benchmarks: 17

## Summary

- They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 3n E4b IT scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen2.5-Max in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Qwen2.5-Max leads 25.6 to 19.9.
- Gemma 3n E4b IT has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | Gemma 3n E4b IT | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Google | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 37.3 | 40.7 |
| Rank | 206 | 146 |
| Context | — | — |
| Input $/M | — | — |
| Output $/M | — | — |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |

## Coding

- Gemma 3n E4b IT: 37.0 (#198)
- Qwen2.5-Max: 41.8 (#117)

| Benchmark | Gemma 3n E4b IT | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1268 | 1359 |
| LiveBench Coding | — | 64.4% |

## Reasoning

- Gemma 3n E4b IT: 19.9 (#247)
- Qwen2.5-Max: 25.6 (#147)

| Benchmark | Gemma 3n E4b IT | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1284 | 1360 |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 31.5% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | — | 51.4% |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | — | 67.9% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 132.53 |
| LiveBench | — | 62.3% |

## Math

- Gemma 3n E4b IT: 35.1 (#188)
- Qwen2.5-Max: 36.9 (#162)

| Benchmark | Gemma 3n E4b IT | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1251 | 1369 |
| LiveBench Math | — | 58.4% |

## Knowledge

- Gemma 3n E4b IT: 34.2 (#198)
- Qwen2.5-Max: 35.3 (#186)

| Benchmark | Gemma 3n E4b IT | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1246 | 1337 |
| Confabulations | — | 21.8% |

## Multilingual

- Gemma 3n E4b IT: 43.4 (#183)
- Qwen2.5-Max: 48.1 (#146)

| Benchmark | Gemma 3n E4b IT | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1285 | 1352 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1309 | 1382 |
| LMArena French | 1330 | 1396 |
| LMArena German | 1311 | 1350 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1272 | 1300 |
| LMArena Korean | 1259 | 1304 |
| LMArena Russian | 1288 | 1353 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1305 | 1377 |

## Instruction Following

- Gemma 3n E4b IT: 66.1 (#210)
- Qwen2.5-Max: 71.3 (#152)

| Benchmark | Gemma 3n E4b IT | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1255 | 1335 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | — | 75.3% |

## Long Context

- Gemma 3n E4b IT: 38.7 (#191)
- Qwen2.5-Max: 41.4 (#142)

| Benchmark | Gemma 3n E4b IT | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1276 | 1358 |

## Writing & Preference

- Gemma 3n E4b IT: 50.1 (#186)
- Qwen2.5-Max: 55.4 (#146)

| Benchmark | Gemma 3n E4b IT | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1306 | 1367 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1287 | 1339 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1276 | 1364 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | — | 72.9% |
| LiveBench Language | — | 56.3% |

## FAQ

### Is Gemma 3n E4b IT better than Qwen2.5-Max?

Qwen2.5-Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.7 to 37.3 on the Noometry Index.

### Is Gemma 3n E4b IT or Qwen2.5-Max better for coding?

Qwen2.5-Max scores higher on coding benchmarks: 41.8 versus 37.0 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do Gemma 3n E4b IT and Qwen2.5-Max share?

17 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 3n E4b IT has 18 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5-Max has 27.