Model Comparison

Gemma 3n E2B Instructed vs Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking

Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Want to compare interactively?Try the playground

Performance Benchmarks

Comparative analysis across standard metrics

6 benchmarks

Gemma 3n E2B Instructed outperforms in 0 benchmarks, while Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking is better at 6 benchmarks (AIME 2025, GPQA, Include, MMLU, MMLU-Pro, MMLU-ProX).

Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Tue May 26 2026 • llm-stats.com

Arena Performance

Human preference votes

Model Size

Parameter count comparison

25.0B diff

Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking has 25.0B more parameters than Gemma 3n E2B Instructed, making it 312.5% larger.

Gemma 3n E2B Instructed

8.0Bparameters

Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking

33.0Bparameters

8.0B

Gemma 3n E2B Instructed

33.0B

Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking

Input Capabilities

Supported data types and modalities

Both Gemma 3n E2B Instructed and Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking support multimodal inputs.

They are both capable of processing various types of data, offering versatility in application.

Gemma 3n E2B Instructed

Text

Images

Audio

Video

Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking

Text

Images

Audio

Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Gemma 3n E2B Instructed is licensed under a proprietary license, while Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking uses Apache 2.0.

License differences may affect how you can use these models in commercial or open-source projects.

Gemma 3n E2B Instructed

Proprietary

Closed source

Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking

Apache 2.0

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Gemma 3n E2B Instructed was released on 2025-06-26, while Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking was released on 2025-09-22.

Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking is 3 months newer than Gemma 3n E2B Instructed.

Gemma 3n E2B Instructed

Jun 26, 2025

11 months ago

Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking

Sep 22, 2025

8 months ago

2mo newer

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Gemma 3n E2B Instructed has a documented knowledge cutoff of 2024-06-01, while Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking's cutoff date is not specified.

We can confirm Gemma 3n E2B Instructed's training data extends to 2024-06-01, but cannot make a direct comparison without Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking's cutoff date.

Gemma 3n E2B Instructed

Jun 2024

Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking

—

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion→

Key Takeaways

Gemma 3n E2B Instructed

View details

Google

No standout differentiators in the data we have for this pair.

Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking

View details

Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team

Has open weights

Higher AIME 2025 score (83.7% vs 6.7%)

Higher GPQA score (73.1% vs 24.8%)

Higher Include score (76.3% vs 38.6%)

Higher MMLU score (88.7% vs 60.1%)

Higher MMLU-Pro score (82.1% vs 40.5%)

Higher MMLU-ProX score (77.2% vs 8.1%)

Detailed Comparison

AI Model Comparison Table
Feature	Gemma 3n E2B Instructed	Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking

FAQ

Common questions about Gemma 3n E2B Instructed vs Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking.

Which is better, Gemma 3n E2B Instructed or Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking?

Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking significantly outperforms across most benchmarks. Gemma 3n E2B Instructed is made by Google and Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking is made by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their benchmark scores, pricing, and capabilities above.

How does Gemma 3n E2B Instructed compare to Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking in benchmarks?

Gemma 3n E2B Instructed scores HumanEval: 66.5%, MMLU: 60.1%, Global-MMLU-Lite: 59.0%, MBPP: 56.6%, Global-MMLU: 55.1%. Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking scores DocVQAtest: 96.1%, ScreenSpot: 95.7%, MMLU-Redux: 91.9%, MMBench-V1.1: 90.8%, CharXiv-D: 90.2%.

What are the main differences between Gemma 3n E2B Instructed and Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking?

Key differences include licensing (Proprietary vs Apache 2.0). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Gemma 3n E2B Instructed and Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking?

Gemma 3n E2B Instructed is developed by Google and Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking is developed by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team.