Alibaba Qwen QwQ 32B vs Google Gemini 2.0 Flash

Detailed comparison for LLMs

AlibabaGoogle

On Guardion's LLM vulnerability Benchmark, Google Gemini 2.0 Flash is the more secure of the two: Qwen QwQ 32B scores 40.0% and Gemini 2.0 Flash scores 33.6% on attack success rate (ASR) (lower is better).

Head-to-Head Overview

Gemini 2.0 Flash is the overall winner in this comparison!

Attack Success Rate (lower is safer)

ASR for Alibaba Qwen QwQ 32B vs Google Gemini 2.0 Flash. Green marks the safer model on each metric.

Overall (ASR)

Qwen QwQ 32B
40.0%
Gemini 2.0 Flash
33.6%

TAP Attack Method (ASR)

Qwen QwQ 32B
73.9%
Gemini 2.0 Flash
67.6%

Crescendo Attack Method (ASR)

Qwen QwQ 32B
40.9%
Gemini 2.0 Flash
30.4%

Zero-Shot (ASR)

Qwen QwQ 32B
5.3%
Gemini 2.0 Flash
2.8%

Key Highlights

  • Google Gemini 2.0 Flash has a lower Overall (ASR).
  • Google Gemini 2.0 Flash has a lower TAP Attack Method (ASR).
  • Google Gemini 2.0 Flash has a lower Crescendo Attack Method (ASR).
  • Google Gemini 2.0 Flash has a lower Zero-Shot (ASR).

Security Profile

Outward is better on every axis.

OverallTAPCrescendoZero-Shot
Qwen QwQ 32B
Gemini 2.0 Flash
Full security profile
Alibaba Qwen QwQ 32B
Full security profile
Google Gemini 2.0 Flash

Frequently asked questions

Is Alibaba Qwen QwQ 32B or Google Gemini 2.0 Flash more secure?

On Guardion's LLM vulnerability Benchmark, Google Gemini 2.0 Flash is the more secure of the two: Qwen QwQ 32B scores 40.0% and Gemini 2.0 Flash scores 33.6% on attack success rate (ASR) (lower is better).

What is the attack success rate (ASR) of Qwen QwQ 32B vs Gemini 2.0 Flash?

Qwen QwQ 32B has a 40.0% ASR and Gemini 2.0 Flash has a 33.6% ASR — the share of adversarial prompts that succeed across zero-shot, TAP, and Crescendo attacks. Lower is safer.

How were Qwen QwQ 32B and Gemini 2.0 Flash tested?

Both were red-teamed with the HarmBench framework across zero-shot, TAP (Tree of Attacks with Pruning), and Crescendo multi-turn attacks, scored by Attack Success Rate.

Related Comparisons