Gemini 4 Carbon vs Qwen2.5 VL 7B Instruct
Gemini 4 Carbon: 89.4% average across five Vision Evals tasks (#1 of 68 models). We have not run Qwen2.5 VL 7B Instruct through Roboflow's Vision Evals, so there is no head-to-head score.
Compare Gemini 4 Carbon vs Qwen2.5 VL 7B Instruct live
Run the same image across every model that supports a task and compare their outputs side-by-side.
Extract and compare text from images across multiple models.
Upload an image
Drag and drop an image here, or click to browse
Qwen2.5 VL 7B Instruct can't be run right now. See its model page for details.
Gemini 4 Carbon vs Qwen2.5 VL 7B Instruct Comparison Table
Evals updated November 10, 2026
| Property | Gemini 4 Carbon | Qwen2.5 VL 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Organization | Qwen | |
| Category | closed | open |
| Modality | multimodal | multimodal |
| Release Date | Nov 2026 | Jan 2025 |
| Context Window | 1.0M | 33K |
| Parameters | Unknown | 7B |
| License | Proprietary | Apache 2.0 |
| Commercial use | commercial use per vendor terms | free for commercial use |
| Vision Tasks | ||
| Captioning | Demo | Supported |
| Classification | Demo | Supported |
| Object Detection | Demo | Supported |
| OCR | Demo | Supported |
| Visual Question Answering | Demo | Supported |
| Promptable Concept Segmentation | Demo | Not listed |
| Model Features | ||
Both support 3 more features | ||
Vision Evalsground-truth scores across 5 vision tasks, pooled at low effort | ||
| Overall | 89.4% | Not evaluated |
| Avg cost / sample | $0.0061 | – |
| Avg speed / sample | 8.71s | – |
| By task | ||
| Object Detection (low) | 84.5% ±0.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 84.2 to 84.8 | – |
| Object Detection (high) | 85.9% ±0.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 85.6 to 86.2 | – |
| Counting (low) | 90.1% ±1.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 89.2 to 91.9 | – |
| Counting (high) | 86.9% ±2.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 83.8 to 89.2 | – |
| Identification (low) | 93.8% ±0.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 93.8 to 93.8 | – |
| Identification (high) | 96.9% ±0.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 96.9 to 96.9 | – |
| OCR (low) | 87.2% | – |
| by category |
| |
| OCR (high) | 89.7% | – |
| by category |
| |
| Reasoning (low) | 91.4% ±1.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 90.1 to 93.4 | – |
| Reasoning (high) | 92.3% ±0.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 92.0 to 92.7 | – |
Gemini 4 Carbon vs Qwen2.5 VL 7B Instruct: Overview
Gemini 4 Carbon is a multimodal model from Google. It builds on Gemini 4 Argon and supports reasoning over text and images. Google describes improvements in coding and long-running tasks. Model weights are not publicly released.
Qwen2.5-VL-7B-Instruct is a 7-billion parameter vision-language model from Alibaba’s QwenLM team, released on January 26, 2025 under the Apache 2.0 license. It is the instruction-tuned variant of the 7B scale in the Qwen2.5-VL family, designed to process multimodal inputs such as text, images, charts, documents, and video. The model enables structured outputs—including JSON for structured content and bounding boxes for visual localization. Weights are publicly available on Hugging Face and GitHub, making it suitable for both research and applied multimodal use.
Frequently Asked Questions
Gemini 4 Carbon is released under Proprietary, while Qwen2.5 VL 7B Instruct uses Apache 2.0. In practice: Gemini 4 Carbon: commercial use per vendor terms; Qwen2.5 VL 7B Instruct: free for commercial use. Licensing often matters more than raw accuracy for commercial deployments, so check the terms against how you plan to ship.
Yes. The comparison demo on this page runs both models on the same image side by side for image captioning and OCR in the free Roboflow Playground. You can try it instantly, and a free account unlocks unlimited runs.