Model comparison
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite vs Llama 4 Scout
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite is the stronger model overall, scoring 37.3 to 27.4 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 25 shared benchmarks.
Google
MetaSummary
- They share 25 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite scores higher in 8 categories and Llama 4 Scout in 1 category; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in coding, where Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite leads 37.4 to 19.9.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is DTBench: 52.5% for Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite and 57.9% for Llama 4 Scout.
- Llama 4 Scout has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite | Llama 4 Scout | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Meta | |
| Noometry Index | 37.3 | 27.4 |
| Released | 2025-02-05 | 2025-04-05 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | — | 128K |
| Max output | — | 4K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.10 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $0.30 |
| Results tracked | 32 | 43 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 37.4 (#181), Llama 4 Scout: 19.9 (#334)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite | Llama 4 Scout |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1322 | 1286 |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | — | 9.1% |
| SciCode | — | 17% |
| LiveBench Coding | 47.1% | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 43.1% |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: —, Llama 4 Scout: 24.4 (#109)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite | Llama 4 Scout |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 28.1% |
Reasoning Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 21.2 (#203), Llama 4 Scout: 9.2 (#339)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite | Llama 4 Scout |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1324 | 1266 |
| DTBench | 52.5% | 57.9% |
| ForecastBench | 57.1 | 57.5 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | — | 0% |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 36.9% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | — | 0.5% |
| CritPt | — | 0% |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 50.1% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 65.5% | — |
| LMCA | — | 12% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 129.64 |
| LiveBench | 54.3% | — |
Math Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 31.8 (#192), Llama 4 Scout: 18.4 (#280)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite | Llama 4 Scout |
|---|---|---|
| Omni-MATH | 37.4% | 37.3% |
| LMArena Math | 1309 | 1286 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 7.8% |
| LiveBench Math | 58.1% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 62.3% |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 0% |
Knowledge Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 34.6 (#185), Llama 4 Scout: 31.8 (#208)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite | Llama 4 Scout |
|---|---|---|
| MMLU-Pro | 72% | 74.2% |
| GPQA (HELM) | 50% | 50.7% |
| LMArena Expert | 1305 | 1236 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 51.8% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 7.7% |
Multimodal Too close to call
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 30.6 (#103), Llama 4 Scout: 31.6 (#98)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite | Llama 4 Scout |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1100 | 1118 |
| SpatialViz-Bench | — | 34.2% |
Multilingual Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 46.2 (#156), Llama 4 Scout: 41.3 (#207)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite | Llama 4 Scout |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1323 | 1253 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1339 | 1256 |
| LMArena French | 1346 | 1283 |
| LMArena German | 1306 | 1274 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1302 | 1209 |
| LMArena Korean | 1325 | 1207 |
| LMArena Russian | 1328 | 1263 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1313 | 1277 |
Instruction Following Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 70.6 (#158), Llama 4 Scout: 66.0 (#212)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite | Llama 4 Scout |
|---|---|---|
| IFEval | 82.4% | 81.8% |
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1305 | 1248 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 78.3% | — |
Long Context Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 40.1 (#155), Llama 4 Scout: 27.5 (#289)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite | Llama 4 Scout |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1321 | 1265 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 36% |
Writing & Preference Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 51.9 (#172), Llama 4 Scout: 37.1 (#256)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite | Llama 4 Scout |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1330 | 1279 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1319 | 1249 |
| WildBench | 79% | 78% |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1307 | 1281 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 783 |
| LiveBench Language | 34.3% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite better than Llama 4 Scout?
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite is the stronger model overall, scoring 37.3 to 27.4 on the Noometry Index.
Is Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite or Llama 4 Scout better for coding?
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite scores higher on coding benchmarks: 37.4 versus 19.9 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite and Llama 4 Scout share?
25 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite has 32 scored results on Noometry and Llama 4 Scout has 43.