Alibaba Qwen3-Max vs Google Gemini 2.5 Pro

Detailed comparison for LLMs

AlibabaGoogle

On Guardion's LLM vulnerability Benchmark, Google Gemini 2.5 Pro is the more secure of the two: Qwen3-Max scores 28.0% and Gemini 2.5 Pro scores 16.1% on attack success rate (ASR) (lower is better). One or both scores are estimated from public safety evaluations pending a Guardion benchmark run.

Head-to-Head Overview

Gemini 2.5 Pro is the overall winner in this comparison!

Attack Success Rate (lower is safer)

ASR for Alibaba Qwen3-Max vs Google Gemini 2.5 Pro. Green marks the safer model on each metric. Only the overall score is available for estimated models.

Overall (ASR)

Qwen3-Max
28.0%
Gemini 2.5 Pro
16.1%

TAP Attack Method (ASR)

Qwen3-Max
Gemini 2.5 Pro
27.5%

Crescendo Attack Method (ASR)

Qwen3-Max
Gemini 2.5 Pro
19.1%

Zero-Shot (ASR)

Qwen3-Max
Gemini 2.5 Pro
1.6%

Key Highlights

  • Google Gemini 2.5 Pro has a lower Overall (ASR).

Security Profile

Outward is better on every axis.

OverallTAPCrescendoZero-Shot
Qwen3-Max
Gemini 2.5 Pro
Full security profile
Alibaba Qwen3-Max
Full security profile
Google Gemini 2.5 Pro

Frequently asked questions

Is Alibaba Qwen3-Max or Google Gemini 2.5 Pro more secure?

On Guardion's LLM vulnerability Benchmark, Google Gemini 2.5 Pro is the more secure of the two: Qwen3-Max scores 28.0% and Gemini 2.5 Pro scores 16.1% on attack success rate (ASR) (lower is better). One or both scores are estimated from public safety evaluations pending a Guardion benchmark run.

What is the attack success rate (ASR) of Qwen3-Max vs Gemini 2.5 Pro?

Qwen3-Max has a 28.0% ASR and Gemini 2.5 Pro has a 16.1% ASR — the share of adversarial prompts that succeed across zero-shot, TAP, and Crescendo attacks. Lower is safer.

How were Qwen3-Max and Gemini 2.5 Pro 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