Model comparison
Gemma 1.1 7b IT vs Qwen-14B
Gemma 1.1 7b IT and Qwen-14B score almost the same on the Noometry Index (31.3 vs 31.4), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Last verified . 10 shared benchmarks.
Google
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 10 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 1.1 7b IT scores higher in 7 categories and Qwen-14B in 0 categories; 2 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
Side by side
| Gemma 1.1 7b IT | Qwen-14B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | |
| Noometry Index | 31.3 | 31.4 |
| Released | — | 2023-09-24 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | — | — |
| Max output | — | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Results tracked | 19 | 18 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Too close to call
Gemma 1.1 7b IT: 31.5 (#284), Qwen-14B: 31.2 (#288)
| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 7b IT | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1084 | 1071 |
| HumanEval+ | 35.4% | — |
| MBPP+ | 45% | — |
Reasoning Too close to call
Gemma 1.1 7b IT: 20.5 (#238), Qwen-14B: 19.6 (#257)
| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 7b IT | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1071 | 1027 |
| BIG-Bench Hard | — | 55% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 113.03 |
| LAMBADA | — | 71.1% |
| PIQA | — | 79.9% |
Math Too close to call
Gemma 1.1 7b IT: 32.0 (#220), Qwen-14B: 31.2 (#227)
| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 7b IT | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1107 | 1068 |
| GSM8K | — | 61.3% |
Knowledge Not comparable
Gemma 1.1 7b IT: 28.3 (#247), Qwen-14B: —
| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 7b IT | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1039 | — |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | — | 84.4% |
| BoolQ | — | 86.2% |
| MMLU | — | 66.3% |
Multilingual Too close to call
Gemma 1.1 7b IT: 28.1 (#273), Qwen-14B: 27.5 (#275)
| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 7b IT | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1052 | 1041 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1061 | 1077 |
| LMArena French | 1065 | — |
| LMArena German | 1054 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 971 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 988 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1046 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1049 | — |
Instruction Following Gemma 1.1 7b IT leads
Gemma 1.1 7b IT: 54.0 (#283), Qwen-14B: 52.4 (#289)
| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 7b IT | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1057 | 1031 |
Long Context Too close to call
Gemma 1.1 7b IT: 32.1 (#272), Qwen-14B: 31.3 (#280)
| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 7b IT | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1056 | 1028 |
Writing & Preference Gemma 1.1 7b IT leads
Gemma 1.1 7b IT: 30.4 (#288), Qwen-14B: 27.6 (#299)
| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 7b IT | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1094 | 1051 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1060 | 1028 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1040 | 1022 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemma 1.1 7b IT better than Qwen-14B?
Gemma 1.1 7b IT and Qwen-14B score almost the same on the Noometry Index (31.3 vs 31.4), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Is Gemma 1.1 7b IT or Qwen-14B better for coding?
They score almost the same on coding (31.5 vs 31.2); test both on your own repository before choosing.
How many benchmarks do Gemma 1.1 7b IT and Qwen-14B share?
10 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 1.1 7b IT has 19 scored results on Noometry and Qwen-14B has 18.