Model comparison
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) vs Llama 3.1-70B
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) is the stronger model overall, scoring 35.1 to 29.6 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 33 shared benchmarks.
Google
MetaSummary
- They share 33 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) scores higher in 7 categories and Llama 3.1-70B in 2 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) leads 37.9 to 13.5.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 57.8% for Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) and 3.6% for Llama 3.1-70B.
- Llama 3.1-70B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Llama 3.1-70B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Meta | |
| Noometry Index | 35.1 | 29.6 |
| Released | 2024-12-06 | 2024-07-23 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | — | 128K |
| Max output | — | 4K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.40 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $0.40 |
| Results tracked | 54 | 35 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Llama 3.1-70B leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 28.4 (#315), Llama 3.1-70B: 30.3 (#296)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Llama 3.1-70B |
|---|---|---|
| WeirdML | 25.8% | 9% |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 45.9% | 46.1% |
| LMArena Coding | 1350 | 1260 |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 59.9% | 54.8% |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 13.5% | — |
| Aider Polyglot | 38.2% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 63.4% | — |
| CadEval | 30% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 28.1 (#92), Llama 3.1-70B: 25.1 (#112)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Llama 3.1-70B |
|---|---|---|
| TheAgentCompany | 11.4% | 6.9% |
| BALROG | — | 27.9% |
Reasoning Llama 3.1-70B leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 15.2 (#318), Llama 3.1-70B: 21.6 (#220)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Llama 3.1-70B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1346 | 1241 |
| DTBench | 63.2% | 60% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 135.36 | 125.92 |
| 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% | — |
| LMCA | — | 14.8% |
| LiveBench | 66.9% | — |
Math Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 37.9 (#146), Llama 3.1-70B: 13.5 (#304)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Llama 3.1-70B |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 57.8% | 3.6% |
| Omni-MATH | 45.9% | 21% |
| LMArena Math | 1352 | 1252 |
| MATH Level 5 | 82.2% | 36.7% |
| LiveBench Math | 75.8% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 1.7% | — |
Knowledge Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 32.0 (#213), Llama 3.1-70B: 24.2 (#269)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Llama 3.1-70B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 64.1% | 44.2% |
| MMLU-Pro | 73.7% | 65.3% |
| GPQA (HELM) | 55.6% | 42.6% |
| LMArena Expert | 1339 | 1209 |
| MMLU | 79.7% | 80.1% |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 6.6% | — |
| Confabulations | 12.4% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 36.5 (#79), Llama 3.1-70B: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Llama 3.1-70B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1158 | — |
| GeoBench | 77% | — |
Multilingual Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 47.4 (#149), Llama 3.1-70B: 38.8 (#225)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Llama 3.1-70B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1342 | 1219 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1373 | 1215 |
| LMArena French | 1391 | 1261 |
| LMArena German | 1353 | 1222 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1294 | 1132 |
| LMArena Korean | 1313 | 1140 |
| LMArena Russian | 1351 | 1234 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1363 | 1253 |
Instruction Following Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 74.4 (#97), Llama 3.1-70B: 65.3 (#223)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Llama 3.1-70B |
|---|---|---|
| IFEval | 84.1% | 82.1% |
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1336 | 1231 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 85.8% | — |
Long Context Too close to call
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 38.1 (#203), Llama 3.1-70B: 37.6 (#214)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Llama 3.1-70B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1344 | 1241 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | 61.1% | — |
Writing & Preference Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 49.5 (#190), Llama 3.1-70B: 35.4 (#267)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Llama 3.1-70B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1354 | 1261 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1340 | 1232 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1128 | 784 |
| WildBench | 80% | 75.8% |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1350 | 1256 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 73.8% | — |
| LiveBench Language | 51.3% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) better than Llama 3.1-70B?
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) is the stronger model overall, scoring 35.1 to 29.6 on the Noometry Index.
Is Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) or Llama 3.1-70B better for coding?
Llama 3.1-70B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 30.3 versus 28.4 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) and Llama 3.1-70B share?
33 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) has 54 scored results on Noometry and Llama 3.1-70B has 35.