Model comparison
ERNIE 5.1 vs Gemma 2 2b IT
ERNIE 5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.1 to 32.5 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 17 shared benchmarks.
Baidu
GoogleSummary
- They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. ERNIE 5.1 scores higher in 8 categories and Gemma 2 2b IT in 0 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where ERNIE 5.1 leads 65.3 to 36.6.
- Gemma 2 2b IT has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| ERNIE 5.1 | Gemma 2 2b IT | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Baidu | |
| Noometry Index | 43.1 | 32.5 |
| Released | — | — |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | — | — |
| Max output | — | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Results tracked | 19 | 17 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding ERNIE 5.1 leads
ERNIE 5.1: 43.4 (#78), Gemma 2 2b IT: 31.8 (#268)
| Benchmark | ERNIE 5.1 | Gemma 2 2b IT |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1488 | 1112 |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
ERNIE 5.1: —, Gemma 2 2b IT: —
| Benchmark | ERNIE 5.1 | Gemma 2 2b IT |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Search | 1227 | — |
Reasoning Too close to call
ERNIE 5.1: 20.9 (#209), Gemma 2 2b IT: 20.5 (#219)
| Benchmark | ERNIE 5.1 | Gemma 2 2b IT |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1481 | 1113 |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 23.4% | — |
Math ERNIE 5.1 leads
ERNIE 5.1: 37.5 (#96), Gemma 2 2b IT: 30.1 (#212)
| Benchmark | ERNIE 5.1 | Gemma 2 2b IT |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1481 | 1135 |
Knowledge ERNIE 5.1 leads
ERNIE 5.1: 41.2 (#103), Gemma 2 2b IT: 29.3 (#229)
| Benchmark | ERNIE 5.1 | Gemma 2 2b IT |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1491 | 1096 |
Multilingual ERNIE 5.1 leads
ERNIE 5.1: 55.7 (#28), Gemma 2 2b IT: 32.5 (#252)
| Benchmark | ERNIE 5.1 | Gemma 2 2b IT |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1455 | 1121 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1507 | 1132 |
| LMArena French | 1486 | 1156 |
| LMArena German | 1470 | 1114 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1422 | 1083 |
| LMArena Korean | 1428 | 1055 |
| LMArena Russian | 1459 | 1118 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1472 | 1140 |
Instruction Following ERNIE 5.1 leads
ERNIE 5.1: 76.9 (#35), Gemma 2 2b IT: 58.1 (#258)
| Benchmark | ERNIE 5.1 | Gemma 2 2b IT |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1460 | 1118 |
Long Context ERNIE 5.1 leads
ERNIE 5.1: 44.7 (#56), Gemma 2 2b IT: 34.2 (#245)
| Benchmark | ERNIE 5.1 | Gemma 2 2b IT |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1462 | 1130 |
Writing & Preference ERNIE 5.1 leads
ERNIE 5.1: 65.3 (#50), Gemma 2 2b IT: 36.6 (#258)
| Benchmark | ERNIE 5.1 | Gemma 2 2b IT |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1468 | 1156 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1440 | 1147 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1471 | 1118 |
Frequently asked questions
Is ERNIE 5.1 better than Gemma 2 2b IT?
ERNIE 5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.1 to 32.5 on the Noometry Index.
Is ERNIE 5.1 or Gemma 2 2b IT better for coding?
ERNIE 5.1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 43.4 versus 31.8 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do ERNIE 5.1 and Gemma 2 2b IT share?
17 benchmarks have published results for both models. ERNIE 5.1 has 19 scored results on Noometry and Gemma 2 2b IT has 17.