Model comparison
Gemini 2.5 Flash vs Qwen2-72B
Gemini 2.5 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.3 to 30.0 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 20 shared benchmarks.
Google
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 20 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 2.5 Flash scores higher in 8 categories and Qwen2-72B in 1 category; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in multilingual, where Gemini 2.5 Flash leads 52.3 to 35.9.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is TheAgentCompany: 41.1% for Gemini 2.5 Flash and 1.1% for Qwen2-72B.
- Qwen2-72B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Gemini 2.5 Flash | Qwen2-72B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | |
| Noometry Index | 39.3 | 30.0 |
| Released | 2025-04-17 | 2024-06-07 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 1.05M | — |
| Max output | 66K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.30 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $2.50 | — |
| Results tracked | 54 | 26 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Gemini 2.5 Flash leads
Gemini 2.5 Flash: 35.8 (#220), Qwen2-72B: 29.1 (#310)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash | Qwen2-72B |
|---|---|---|
| WeirdML | 41.9% | 11.3% |
| LMArena Coding | 1424 | 1196 |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 28.7% | — |
| Aider Polyglot | 55.1% | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 38.5% |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 54% |
| ALE-Bench | 661.88 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Gemini 2.5 Flash leads
Gemini 2.5 Flash: 30.8 (#74), Qwen2-72B: 17.0 (#146)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash | Qwen2-72B |
|---|---|---|
| TheAgentCompany | 41.1% | 1.1% |
| Terminal-Bench | 17.1% | — |
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 56.2% | — |
| BALROG | 33.5% | — |
| METR Time Horizons | — | 29.9% |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 548.84 | — |
Reasoning Qwen2-72B leads
Gemini 2.5 Flash: 18.1 (#286), Qwen2-72B: 23.2 (#181)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash | Qwen2-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1422 | 1191 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 143.03 | 125.28 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 2.5% | — |
| SimpleBench | 41.2% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 56.8% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 33.3% | — |
| CritPt | 1.1% | — |
| EnigmaEval | 2.7% | — |
| DTBench | 76.5% | — |
| LMCA | 27.5% | — |
| ForecastBench | 60.6 | — |
Math Gemini 2.5 Flash leads
Gemini 2.5 Flash: 39.9 (#98), Qwen2-72B: 30.2 (#236)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash | Qwen2-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1415 | 1235 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 73.1% | — |
| Omni-MATH | 38.5% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 39.1% |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 4.8% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 4.2% | — |
Knowledge Gemini 2.5 Flash leads
Gemini 2.5 Flash: 36.4 (#168), Qwen2-72B: 21.2 (#275)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash | Qwen2-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1426 | 1171 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 40.8% |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 12.1% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | 63.9% | — |
| Confabulations | 16.8% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 7.8% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 39% | — |
| MMLU | — | 82.4% |
Multimodal Not comparable
Gemini 2.5 Flash: 41.8 (#32), Qwen2-72B: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash | Qwen2-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1253 | — |
| GeoBench | 76% | — |
| VPCT | 46.2% | — |
| SpatialViz-Bench | 36.9% | — |
Multilingual Gemini 2.5 Flash leads
Gemini 2.5 Flash: 52.3 (#88), Qwen2-72B: 35.9 (#244)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash | Qwen2-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1409 | 1176 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1450 | 1240 |
| LMArena French | 1433 | 1170 |
| LMArena German | 1418 | 1151 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1405 | 1111 |
| LMArena Korean | 1385 | 1083 |
| LMArena Russian | 1415 | 1169 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1421 | 1169 |
Instruction Following Gemini 2.5 Flash leads
Gemini 2.5 Flash: 75.7 (#54), Qwen2-72B: 61.7 (#241)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash | Qwen2-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1405 | 1181 |
| IFEval | 89.8% | — |
Long Context Gemini 2.5 Flash leads
Gemini 2.5 Flash: 47.5 (#17), Qwen2-72B: 36.1 (#235)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash | Qwen2-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1419 | 1192 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | 77.8% | — |
Writing & Preference Gemini 2.5 Flash leads
Gemini 2.5 Flash: 53.8 (#157), Qwen2-72B: 40.8 (#241)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash | Qwen2-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1417 | 1203 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1400 | 1181 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1408 | 1196 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 76.5% | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1137 | — |
| WildBench | 81.7% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemini 2.5 Flash better than Qwen2-72B?
Gemini 2.5 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.3 to 30.0 on the Noometry Index.
Is Gemini 2.5 Flash or Qwen2-72B better for coding?
Gemini 2.5 Flash scores higher on coding benchmarks: 35.8 versus 29.1 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Gemini 2.5 Flash and Qwen2-72B share?
20 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 2.5 Flash has 54 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2-72B has 26.