Model comparison
Gemini 2.5 Pro vs Qwen Plus
Gemini 2.5 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.0 to 37.1 on the Noometry Index. Qwen Plus costs 5.7× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Gemini 2.5 Pro's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 20 shared benchmarks.
Google
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 20 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 2.5 Pro scores higher in 8 categories and Qwen Plus in 0 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Gemini 2.5 Pro leads 56.0 to 27.4.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 84.7% for Gemini 2.5 Pro and 17.8% for Qwen Plus.
- Qwen Plus is cheaper at $0.40 / $1.20 per million input/output tokens, against $1.25 / $10 for Gemini 2.5 Pro.
- Gemini 2.5 Pro accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 1M.
Side by side
| Gemini 2.5 Pro | Qwen Plus | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | |
| Noometry Index | 45.0 | 37.1 |
| Released | 2025-03-25 | 2024-01-25 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | 1.05M | 1M |
| Max output | 66K | 33K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $1.25 | $0.40 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $10 | $1.20 |
| Results tracked | 78 | 20 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Gemini 2.5 Pro leads
Gemini 2.5 Pro: 42.4 (#101), Qwen Plus: 38.9 (#167)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1452 | 1328 |
| SWE-bench Verified | 57.6% | — |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 53.6% | — |
| Aider Polyglot | 83.1% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1227 | — |
| SciCode | 42.8% | — |
| GSO | 3.9% | — |
| WeirdML | 54% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 85.9% | — |
| CadEval | 64% | — |
| ALE-Bench | 785.52 | — |
| AlgoTune | 1.51 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Gemini 2.5 Pro: 29.2 (#88), Qwen Plus: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | 32.6% | — |
| GDPval | 23.3% | — |
| Remote Labor Index | 0.8% | — |
| TheAgentCompany | 30.3% | — |
| τ²-bench Banking | 13.7% | — |
| DeepResearch Bench | 42.8% | — |
| BALROG | 43.3% | — |
| LMArena Search | 1142 | — |
| METR Time Horizons | 55.4% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 573.64 | — |
Reasoning Too close to call
Gemini 2.5 Pro: 28.8 (#99), Qwen Plus: 28.4 (#107)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 70.3% | 63.3% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1455 | 1317 |
| DTBench | 82.4% | 81.1% |
| LMCA | 34.8% | 24% |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 4.9% | — |
| SimpleBench | 62.4% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 41% | — |
| CritPt | 2% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 20% | — |
| EnigmaEval | 5.6% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 89.8% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 79.9% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 145.32 | — |
| ForecastBench | 61.3 | — |
| LiveBench | 82.3% | — |
Math Gemini 2.5 Pro leads
Gemini 2.5 Pro: 32.5 (#213), Qwen Plus: 23.3 (#271)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 84.7% | 17.8% |
| LMArena Math | 1450 | 1326 |
| MATH Level 5 | 95.9% | 65.3% |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 14.1% | 1.7% |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 24.6% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 0% | — |
| Omni-MATH | 41.6% | — |
| LiveBench Math | 90.2% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 4.2% | — |
Knowledge Gemini 2.5 Pro leads
Gemini 2.5 Pro: 56.0 (#46), Qwen Plus: 27.4 (#251)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 85.3% | 48.1% |
| LMArena Expert | 1452 | 1328 |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 21.6% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | 86.3% | — |
| Confabulations | 10.6% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 7% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 74.9% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Gemini 2.5 Pro: 45.2 (#18), Qwen Plus: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1263 | — |
| GeoBench | 86% | — |
| VPCT | 48% | — |
| LMArena Document | 1421 | — |
| SpatialViz-Bench | 44.7% | — |
Multilingual Gemini 2.5 Pro leads
Gemini 2.5 Pro: 55.3 (#31), Qwen Plus: 45.1 (#175)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1451 | 1310 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1507 | 1347 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1461 | 1251 |
| LMArena Russian | 1461 | 1323 |
| LMArena French | 1472 | — |
| LMArena German | 1487 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1434 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1473 | — |
Instruction Following Gemini 2.5 Pro leads
Gemini 2.5 Pro: 75.0 (#75), Qwen Plus: 68.8 (#181)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1437 | 1303 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 80.6% | — |
| IFEval | 84% | — |
Long Context Gemini 2.5 Pro leads
Gemini 2.5 Pro: 59.8 (#5), Qwen Plus: 40.3 (#158)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1449 | 1324 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | 91.7% | — |
Writing & Preference Gemini 2.5 Pro leads
Gemini 2.5 Pro: 63.7 (#62), Qwen Plus: 52.2 (#176)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1458 | 1326 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1454 | 1293 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1453 | 1336 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 83.8% | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1421 | — |
| WildBench | 85.7% | — |
| LiveBench Language | 67.8% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemini 2.5 Pro better than Qwen Plus?
Gemini 2.5 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.0 to 37.1 on the Noometry Index. Qwen Plus costs 5.7× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Gemini 2.5 Pro's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, Gemini 2.5 Pro or Qwen Plus?
Qwen Plus is cheaper. It lists at $0.40 per million input tokens and $1.20 per million output tokens; Gemini 2.5 Pro lists at $1.25 and $10.
Is Gemini 2.5 Pro or Qwen Plus better for coding?
Gemini 2.5 Pro scores higher on coding benchmarks: 42.4 versus 38.9 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Gemini 2.5 Pro does, with 1.05M tokens against 1M.
How many benchmarks do Gemini 2.5 Pro and Qwen Plus share?
20 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 2.5 Pro has 78 scored results on Noometry and Qwen Plus has 20.