Model comparison
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) vs Llama 2-70B
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) is the stronger model overall, scoring 35.1 to 24.4 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 23 shared benchmarks.
Google
MetaSummary
- They share 23 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) scores higher in 7 categories and Llama 2-70B in 1 category; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) leads 37.9 to 8.1.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is MATH Level 5: 82.2% for Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) and 3.3% for Llama 2-70B.
- Llama 2-70B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Llama 2-70B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Meta | |
| Noometry Index | 35.1 | 24.4 |
| Released | 2024-12-06 | 2023-07-18 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | — | — |
| Max output | — | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Results tracked | 54 | 35 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Llama 2-70B leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 28.4 (#315), Llama 2-70B: 31.4 (#286)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Llama 2-70B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1350 | 1079 |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 13.5% | — |
| Aider Polyglot | 38.2% | — |
| WeirdML | 25.8% | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 45.9% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 63.4% | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 59.9% | — |
| CadEval | 30% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 28.1 (#92), Llama 2-70B: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Llama 2-70B |
|---|---|---|
| TheAgentCompany | 11.4% | — |
Reasoning Too close to call
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 15.2 (#318), Llama 2-70B: 14.4 (#325)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Llama 2-70B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1346 | 1073 |
| DTBench | 63.2% | 41.6% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 135.36 | 113.79 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 1.3% | — |
| SimpleBench | 31.1% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 37.8% | — |
| EnigmaEval | 1.1% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 78.2% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 69.4% | — |
| BIG-Bench Hard | — | 64.9% |
| CommonsenseQA 2.0 | — | 50% |
| ForecastBench | — | 51.4 |
| HellaSwag | — | 85.3% |
| LAMBADA | — | 78.9% |
| LiveBench | 66.9% | — |
| PIQA | — | 82.8% |
| WinoGrande | — | 80.2% |
Math Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 37.9 (#146), Llama 2-70B: 8.1 (#326)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Llama 2-70B |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 57.8% | 0% |
| LMArena Math | 1352 | 1091 |
| MATH Level 5 | 82.2% | 3.3% |
| Omni-MATH | 45.9% | — |
| LiveBench Math | 75.8% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 1.7% | — |
| GSM8K | — | 69.6% |
Knowledge Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 32.0 (#213), Llama 2-70B: 7.4 (#310)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Llama 2-70B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 64.1% | 26.3% |
| LMArena Expert | 1339 | 1039 |
| MMLU | 79.7% | 69.9% |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 6.6% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | 73.7% | — |
| Confabulations | 12.4% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 55.6% | — |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | — | 78.3% |
| BoolQ | — | 88.6% |
| OpenBookQA | — | 60.2% |
| TriviaQA | — | 87.6% |
Multimodal Not comparable
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 36.5 (#79), Llama 2-70B: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Llama 2-70B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1158 | — |
| GeoBench | 77% | — |
Multilingual Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 47.4 (#149), Llama 2-70B: 27.7 (#274)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Llama 2-70B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1342 | 1045 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1373 | 995 |
| LMArena French | 1391 | 1090 |
| LMArena German | 1353 | 1041 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1294 | 927 |
| LMArena Korean | 1313 | 964 |
| LMArena Russian | 1351 | 1083 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1363 | 1143 |
Instruction Following Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 74.4 (#97), Llama 2-70B: 54.9 (#278)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Llama 2-70B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1336 | 1071 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 85.8% | — |
| IFEval | 84.1% | — |
Long Context Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 38.1 (#203), Llama 2-70B: 32.3 (#270)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Llama 2-70B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1344 | 1062 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | 61.1% | — |
Writing & Preference Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 49.5 (#190), Llama 2-70B: 32.3 (#279)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Llama 2-70B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1354 | 1115 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1340 | 1075 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1350 | 1088 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 73.8% | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1128 | — |
| WildBench | 80% | — |
| LiveBench Language | 51.3% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) better than Llama 2-70B?
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) is the stronger model overall, scoring 35.1 to 24.4 on the Noometry Index.
Is Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) or Llama 2-70B better for coding?
Llama 2-70B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 31.4 versus 28.4 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) and Llama 2-70B share?
23 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) has 54 scored results on Noometry and Llama 2-70B has 35.