Model comparison

Gemma 3n E4b IT vs Qwen2.5-Max

Qwen2.5-Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.1 to 36.7 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 17 shared benchmarks.

Gemma 3n E4b IT Google

36.7

Rank #203 Confirmed

Qwen2.5-Max Alibaba (Qwen)

40.1

Rank #142 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 3n E4b IT scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen2.5-Max in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where Qwen2.5-Max leads 24.6 to 19.2.
  • Gemma 3n E4b IT has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Gemma 3n E4b IT and Qwen2.5-Max specifications
Gemma 3n E4b ITQwen2.5-Max
ProviderGoogleAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index36.740.1
Released2025-05-202025-01-25
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window33K—
Max output33K—
Input $ / M tokens$0.06—
Output $ / M tokens$0.12—
Results tracked1827

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding Qwen2.5-Max leads

Gemma 3n E4b IT: 36.4 (#193), Qwen2.5-Max: 41.2 (#118)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 3n E4b ITQwen2.5-Max
LMArena Coding12691359
LiveBench Coding—64.4%

Reasoning Qwen2.5-Max leads

Gemma 3n E4b IT: 19.2 (#239), Qwen2.5-Max: 24.6 (#144)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 3n E4b ITQwen2.5-Max
LMArena Hard Prompts12841360
Kagi LLM Benchmark31.5%—
LiveBench Reasoning—51.4%
LiveBench Data Analysis—67.9%
Epoch Capabilities Index—132.54
LiveBench—62.3%

Math Qwen2.5-Max leads

Gemma 3n E4b IT: 32.5 (#186), Qwen2.5-Max: 34.3 (#162)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 3n E4b ITQwen2.5-Max
LMArena Math12511369
LiveBench Math—58.4%

Knowledge Qwen2.5-Max leads

Gemma 3n E4b IT: 33.6 (#193), Qwen2.5-Max: 34.8 (#181)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 3n E4b ITQwen2.5-Max
LMArena Expert12451337
Confabulations—21.8%

Multilingual Qwen2.5-Max leads

Gemma 3n E4b IT: 43.5 (#179), Qwen2.5-Max: 48.3 (#140)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 3n E4b ITQwen2.5-Max
LMArena Non-English12851352
LMArena Chinese13101382
LMArena French13301396
LMArena German13121350
LMArena Japanese12741299
LMArena Korean12591304
LMArena Russian12881353
LMArena Spanish13051377

Instruction Following Qwen2.5-Max leads

Gemma 3n E4b IT: 66.3 (#205), Qwen2.5-Max: 71.5 (#147)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 3n E4b ITQwen2.5-Max
LMArena Instruction Following12551335
LiveBench Instruction Following—75.3%

Long Context Qwen2.5-Max leads

Gemma 3n E4b IT: 38.8 (#185), Qwen2.5-Max: 41.3 (#137)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 3n E4b ITQwen2.5-Max
LMArena Longer Query12771358

Writing & Preference Qwen2.5-Max leads

Gemma 3n E4b IT: 50.3 (#181), Qwen2.5-Max: 55.6 (#141)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 3n E4b ITQwen2.5-Max
LMArena Text13061367
LMArena Creative Writing12871339
LMArena Multi-Turn12761364
Short-Story Creative Writing—72.9%
LiveBench Language—56.3%

Frequently asked questions

Is Gemma 3n E4b IT better than Qwen2.5-Max?

Qwen2.5-Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.1 to 36.7 on the Noometry Index.

Is Gemma 3n E4b IT or Qwen2.5-Max better for coding?

Qwen2.5-Max scores higher on coding benchmarks: 41.2 versus 36.4 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Gemma 3n E4b IT and Qwen2.5-Max share?

17 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 3n E4b IT has 18 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5-Max has 27.

Related comparisons

Go deeper