Head-to-head comparison across 1benchmark categories. Overall scores shown here use BenchLM's provisional ranking lane.
Gemma 4 E2B
28
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
64
Verified leaderboard positions: Gemma 4 E2B unranked · Qwen3.6-35B-A3B #13
Pick Qwen3.6-35B-A3B if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Gemma 4 E2B only becomes the better choice if its workflow or ecosystem matters more than the raw scoreboard.
Knowledge
+6.4 difference
Gemma 4 E2B
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
$0 / $0
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
128K
262K
Pick Qwen3.6-35B-A3B if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Gemma 4 E2B only becomes the better choice if its workflow or ecosystem matters more than the raw scoreboard.
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B is clearly ahead on the provisional aggregate, 64 to 28. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B's sharpest advantage is in knowledge, where it averages 60.5 against 54.1. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is GPQA, 43.4% to 86%.
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B gives you the larger context window at 262K, compared with 128K for Gemma 4 E2B.
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 64 to 28. The biggest single separator in this matchup is GPQA, where the scores are 43.4% and 86%.
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 60.5 versus 54.1. Inside this category, GPQA is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
For engineers, researchers, and the plain curious — a weekly brief on new models, ranking shifts, and pricing changes.
Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.