Model comparison
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) vs Qwen2.5 32B Instruct
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) is the stronger model overall, scoring 35.1 to 30.1 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 6 shared benchmarks.
Google
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 6 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) scores higher in 2 categories and Qwen2.5 32B Instruct in 2 categories; 4 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) leads 37.9 to 16.2.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 57.8% for Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) and 7.4% for Qwen2.5 32B Instruct.
- Qwen2.5 32B Instruct has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | |
| Noometry Index | 35.1 | 30.1 |
| Released | 2024-12-06 | 2024-09 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | — | 131K |
| Max output | — | 8K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.70 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $2.80 |
| Results tracked | 54 | 7 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Qwen2.5 32B Instruct leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 28.4 (#315), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: 38.7 (#169)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 45.9% | 45% |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 59.9% | 52.3% |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 13.5% | — |
| Aider Polyglot | 38.2% | — |
| WeirdML | 25.8% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 63.4% | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1350 | — |
| CadEval | 30% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 28.1 (#92), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| TheAgentCompany | 11.4% | — |
Reasoning Qwen2.5 32B Instruct leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 15.2 (#318), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: 19.2 (#266)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 135.36 | 128.52 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 1.3% | — |
| SimpleBench | 31.1% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 37.8% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 0% |
| EnigmaEval | 1.1% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 78.2% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1346 | — |
| DTBench | 63.2% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 69.4% | — |
| LiveBench | 66.9% | — |
Math Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 37.9 (#146), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: 16.2 (#296)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 57.8% | 7.4% |
| MATH Level 5 | 82.2% | 56.1% |
| Omni-MATH | 45.9% | — |
| LiveBench Math | 75.8% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1352 | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 1.7% | — |
Knowledge Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 32.0 (#213), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: 24.9 (#266)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 64.1% | 46.1% |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 6.6% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | 73.7% | — |
| Confabulations | 12.4% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 55.6% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1339 | — |
| MMLU | 79.7% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 36.5 (#79), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1158 | — |
| GeoBench | 77% | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 47.4 (#149), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1342 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1373 | — |
| LMArena French | 1391 | — |
| LMArena German | 1353 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1294 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1313 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1351 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1363 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 74.4 (#97), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 85.8% | — |
| IFEval | 84.1% | — |
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1336 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 38.1 (#203), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | 61.1% | — |
| LMArena Longer Query | 1344 | — |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 49.5 (#190), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1354 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1340 | — |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 73.8% | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1128 | — |
| WildBench | 80% | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1350 | — |
| LiveBench Language | 51.3% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) better than Qwen2.5 32B Instruct?
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) is the stronger model overall, scoring 35.1 to 30.1 on the Noometry Index.
Is Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) or Qwen2.5 32B Instruct better for coding?
Qwen2.5 32B Instruct scores higher on coding benchmarks: 38.7 versus 28.4 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) and Qwen2.5 32B Instruct share?
6 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) has 54 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5 32B Instruct has 7.