+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
Gemma 3 4B vs Qwen2.5 VL 32B Instruct
Comprehensive side-by-side LLM comparison
Qwen2.5 VL 32B Instruct leads with 20.6% higher average benchmark score. Overall, Qwen2.5 VL 32B Instruct is the stronger choice for coding tasks.
+
+
+
+
Gemma 3 4B was developed as a compact yet capable open-source model, designed to strike a balance between performance and resource efficiency. Built with 4 billion parameters and instruction tuning, it provides a practical option for applications requiring moderate capability with manageable computational costs.
+
+
+
+
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen2.5-VL 32B was developed as a mid-sized vision-language model, designed to balance multimodal capability with practical deployment considerations. Built with 32 billion parameters for vision and language integration, it serves applications requiring strong visual understanding without flagship-scale resources.
12 days newer
Qwen2.5 VL 32B Instruct
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
2025-02-28
Gemma 3 4B
2025-03-12
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
Performance Metrics
Context window and performance specifications
Average performance across 8 common benchmarks
+
+
+
+
Gemma 3 4B
Average Score:57.5%
+
+
+
+
Qwen2.5 VL 32B Instruct
Average Score:78.2%(+20.6%)
+
+
+
+
Knowledge Cutoff
Training data recency comparison
Gemma 3 4B
2024-08-01
More recent knowledge cutoff means awareness of newer technologies and frameworks
Provider Availability & Performance
Available providers and their performance metrics
+
+
+
+
Gemma 3 4B
1 providers
DeepInfra
Throughput: 33 tok/s
Latency: 0.2ms
+
+
+
+
Qwen2.5 VL 32B Instruct
+
+
+
+
Gemma 3 4B
Avg Score:57.5%
Providers:1
+
+
+
+
Qwen2.5 VL 32B Instruct
Avg Score:78.2%(+20.6%)
Providers:0