# Gemma 7B vs Qwen1.5-110B

> Qwen1.5-110B is the stronger model overall, scoring 33.6 to 29.5 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/gemma-7b-vs-qwen1-5-110b
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 13

## Summary

- They share 13 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 7B scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen1.5-110B in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Qwen1.5-110B leads 38.1 to 27.2.

## Snapshot

| | Gemma 7B | Qwen1.5-110B |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Google | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 29.5 | 33.6 |
| Rank | 295 | 231 |
| Context | — | — |
| Input $/M | — | — |
| Output $/M | — | — |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- Gemma 7B: 29.9 (#290)
- Qwen1.5-110B: 32.4 (#260)

| Benchmark | Gemma 7B | Qwen1.5-110B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1048 | 1184 |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 35% |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 44.4% |
| HumanEval+ | 28.7% | — |
| MBPP+ | 43.4% | — |

## Reasoning

- Gemma 7B: 19.0 (#247)
- Qwen1.5-110B: 21.7 (#192)

| Benchmark | Gemma 7B | Qwen1.5-110B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1042 | 1168 |
| Adversarial NLI | 48.7% | — |
| BIG-Bench Hard | 55.1% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 111.74 | — |
| ForecastBench | — | 57.7 |
| HellaSwag | 82.2% | — |
| PIQA | 81.2% | — |
| WinoGrande | 79% | — |

## Math

- Gemma 7B: 28.7 (#225)
- Qwen1.5-110B: 31.1 (#199)

| Benchmark | Gemma 7B | Qwen1.5-110B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1066 | 1185 |
| GSM8K | 46.4% | — |

## Knowledge

- Gemma 7B: 26.8 (#248)
- Qwen1.5-110B: 30.7 (#217)

| Benchmark | Gemma 7B | Qwen1.5-110B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1002 | 1144 |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | 78.3% | — |
| BoolQ | 83.2% | — |
| MMLU | 66.1% | — |
| OpenBookQA | 78.6% | — |
| TriviaQA | 72.3% | — |

## Multilingual

- Gemma 7B: 25.3 (#282)
- Qwen1.5-110B: 33.8 (#245)

| Benchmark | Gemma 7B | Qwen1.5-110B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 999 | 1142 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1035 | 1206 |
| LMArena French | 1024 | 1150 |
| LMArena Russian | 993 | 1118 |
| LMArena German | — | 1123 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1074 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1044 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1141 |

## Instruction Following

- Gemma 7B: 51.7 (#290)
- Qwen1.5-110B: 60.6 (#247)

| Benchmark | Gemma 7B | Qwen1.5-110B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1017 | 1158 |

## Long Context

- Gemma 7B: 31.1 (#277)
- Qwen1.5-110B: 35.0 (#237)

| Benchmark | Gemma 7B | Qwen1.5-110B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1022 | 1157 |

## Writing & Preference

- Gemma 7B: 27.2 (#297)
- Qwen1.5-110B: 38.1 (#250)

| Benchmark | Gemma 7B | Qwen1.5-110B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1056 | 1175 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1024 | 1148 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 963 | 1160 |

## FAQ

### Is Gemma 7B better than Qwen1.5-110B?

Qwen1.5-110B is the stronger model overall, scoring 33.6 to 29.5 on the Noometry Index.

### Is Gemma 7B or Qwen1.5-110B better for coding?

Qwen1.5-110B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 32.4 versus 29.9 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do Gemma 7B and Qwen1.5-110B share?

13 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 7B has 27 scored results on Noometry and Qwen1.5-110B has 20.