# Gemma 7B vs Qwen2.5-Coder-32B

> Qwen2.5-Coder-32B is the stronger model overall, scoring 33.4 to 30.0 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/gemma-7b-vs-qwen2-5-coder-32b
- Last updated: 2026-10-12
- Shared benchmarks: 20

## Summary

- They share 20 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 7B scores higher in 1 category and Qwen2.5-Coder-32B in 7 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Qwen2.5-Coder-32B leads 41.6 to 27.1.

## Snapshot

| | Gemma 7B | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Google | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 30.0 | 33.4 |
| Rank | 299 | 245 |
| Context | — | 33K |
| Input $/M | — | $0.66 |
| Output $/M | — | $1 |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- Gemma 7B: 30.5 (#294)
- Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 22.6 (#333)

| Benchmark | Gemma 7B | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1048 | 1276 |
| HumanEval+ | 28.7% | 87.2% |
| MBPP+ | 43.4% | 77% |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | — | 9% |
| Aider Polyglot | — | 16.4% |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 49% |
| LiveBench Coding | — | 56.9% |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 58% |

## Reasoning

- Gemma 7B: 19.9 (#249)
- Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 21.2 (#225)

| Benchmark | Gemma 7B | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1042 | 1251 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 111.99 | 119.49 |
| HellaSwag | 82.2% | 83% |
| WinoGrande | 79% | 80.8% |
| LiveBench Reasoning | — | 42.1% |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | — | 49.9% |
| Adversarial NLI | 48.7% | — |
| BIG-Bench Hard | 55.1% | — |
| LiveBench | — | 46.2% |
| PIQA | 81.2% | — |

## Math

- Gemma 7B: 31.2 (#228)
- Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 33.3 (#204)

| Benchmark | Gemma 7B | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1066 | 1251 |
| GSM8K | 46.4% | 93% |
| LiveBench Math | — | 46.6% |

## Knowledge

- Gemma 7B: 27.3 (#252)
- Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 33.4 (#203)

| Benchmark | Gemma 7B | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1001 | 1221 |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | 78.3% | 70.5% |
| MMLU | 66.1% | 79.1% |
| BoolQ | 83.2% | — |
| OpenBookQA | 78.6% | — |
| TriviaQA | 72.3% | — |

## Multilingual

- Gemma 7B: 25.1 (#287)
- Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 37.8 (#235)

| Benchmark | Gemma 7B | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 999 | 1205 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1035 | 1222 |
| LMArena Russian | 993 | 1228 |
| LMArena French | 1025 | — |

## Instruction Following

- Gemma 7B: 51.5 (#295)
- Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 61.4 (#245)

| Benchmark | Gemma 7B | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1017 | 1223 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | — | 58.7% |

## Long Context

- Gemma 7B: 31.1 (#282)
- Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 38.0 (#208)

| Benchmark | Gemma 7B | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1022 | 1251 |

## Writing & Preference

- Gemma 7B: 27.1 (#302)
- Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 41.6 (#240)

| Benchmark | Gemma 7B | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1056 | 1230 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1024 | 1174 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 963 | 1222 |
| LiveBench Language | — | 23.3% |

## FAQ

### Is Gemma 7B better than Qwen2.5-Coder-32B?

Qwen2.5-Coder-32B is the stronger model overall, scoring 33.4 to 30.0 on the Noometry Index.

### Is Gemma 7B or Qwen2.5-Coder-32B better for coding?

Gemma 7B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 30.5 versus 22.6 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do Gemma 7B and Qwen2.5-Coder-32B share?

20 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 7B has 27 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5-Coder-32B has 31.