Gemma 4 E2B vs Qwen3.5 0.8B
Wins 7 of 7 areas
Coding · Agents · Reasoning · Facts · Images and charts · Long documents · Following instructions
Wins 0 of 7 areas
—
Gemma 4 E2B is the stronger all-rounder.
Scores updated · 26 tests both models report · How we compare
Where each one wins
Tests won in each of the seven areas where both have results. Each piece is one test, so a longer bar means more evidence; grey means the two scored within a point of each other.
- ReasoningHard problems that need careful thinking20Gemma 4 E2B2 of 3 tests · 1 tie
- CodingWriting and fixing software20Gemma 4 E2B2 of 2 tests
- FactsGetting facts right instead of making them up20Gemma 4 E2B2 of 2 tests
- AgentsCarrying out multi-step tasks on its own10Gemma 4 E2B1 of 2 tests · 1 tie
- Images and chartsUnderstanding pictures, charts and video10Gemma 4 E2B1 of 1 test
- Long documentsFinding answers in very long texts10Gemma 4 E2B1 of 1 test
- Following instructionsDoing exactly what it is asked10Gemma 4 E2B1 of 1 test
Images and charts, long documents and following instructions rest on a single test each.
The biggest differences
The tests each model wins by the widest margin, up to three each. Scores are out of 100.
Where Gemma 4 E2B pulls ahead
- Graduate-level biology, physics and chemistry questionsGPQA Diamond+32.2points ahead
- Avoids making up answers it doesn't knowAA-Omniscience · Non-hallucination+28.9points ahead
- Harder college exam questions with imagesMMMU-Pro+18.8points ahead
Where Qwen3.5 0.8B pulls ahead
No clear win on a test scored out of 100.
Every test, side by side
All 26 tests both models report. The winning score is in its model's colour; marks a score checked independently.
CodingGemma 4 E2B
- SciCodeGemma 4 E2B by 20.920.90+20.9
- Terminal-Bench HardGemma 4 E2B by 330+3
ReasoningGemma 4 E2B
- GPQA DiamondGemma 4 E2B by 32.243.311.1+32.2
- Humanity's Last ExamGemma 4 E2B by 3.74.81.1+3.7
- CritPttie00tie
FactsGemma 4 E2B
- AA-Omniscience · Non-hallucinationGemma 4 E2B by 28.967.638.7+28.9
- AA-Omniscience · AccuracyGemma 4 E2B by 2.46.64.2+2.4
Following instructionsGemma 4 E2B
- IFBenchGemma 4 E2B by 16.53821.5+16.5
Other results14 tests, not counted
Tests outside the eight areas. They are not counted above: several are summary scores built from other tests, or the same test under another name.
- AA-OmniscienceGemma 4 E2B by 30.9-23.6-54.5+30.9
- τ²-Bench Telecom (AA run)Qwen3.5 0.8B by 26.920.847.7+26.9
- MMMLUGemma 4 E2B by 23.167.444.3+23.1
- t2-benchGemma 4 E2B by 17.829.411.6+17.8
- MMLU-ProGemma 4 E2B by 17.76042.3+17.7
- BFCL v3Gemma 4 E2B by 16.856.439.6+16.8
- τ²-Bench (Retail)Gemma 4 E2B by 1218.97+12
- IFEvalGemma 4 E2B by 11.88371.2+11.8
- τ²-BenchGemma 4 E2B by 10.224.514.3+10.2
- BFCLv4Gemma 4 E2B by 7.933.225.3+7.9
- Artificial Analysis Coding IndexGemma 4 E2B by 7.27.20+7.2
- AA Agentic IndexQwen3.5 0.8B by 4.21.55.7+4.2
- VLM Judge ScoreGemma 4 E2B by 2.184.482.3+2.1
- AA IntelligenceGemma 4 E2B by 1.77.86.1+1.7
Questions people ask
Which is better, Gemma 4 E2B or Qwen3.5 0.8B?
Gemma 4 E2B wins all seven areas where both have results: coding, agents, reasoning, facts, images and charts, long documents and following instructions. Qwen3.5 0.8B wins none.
Which is better for coding?
Gemma 4 E2B. It wins 2 of the 2 coding tests both models report; Qwen3.5 0.8B wins none.
How do you compare the two?
We use the 26 benchmark tests both models have published scores on. The verdict counts the 12 tests in the eight capability areas, and a gap under one point (ten on rating-style scales) counts as a tie. The other 14 are listed but not counted, because several are summary scores or repeat a test. Each score is the one shown on the model's own page.