Model comparison

Gemini 2.0 Pro vs Granite 3.1 2b Instruct

Gemini 2.0 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.1 to 33.2 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.

Gemini 2.0 Pro Google

39.1

Rank #173 Confirmed

Granite 3.1 2b Instruct IBM

33.2

Rank #247 Confirmed

Summary

  • The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Gemini 2.0 Pro leads 52.7 to 34.1.
  • Granite 3.1 2b Instruct has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Gemini 2.0 Pro and Granite 3.1 2b Instruct specifications
Gemini 2.0 ProGranite 3.1 2b Instruct
ProviderGoogleIBM
Noometry Index39.133.2
Released2025-02-05—
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window——
Max output——
Input $ / M tokens——
Output $ / M tokens——
Results tracked1412

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding Gemini 2.0 Pro leads

Gemini 2.0 Pro: 37.8 (#187), Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 33.4 (#257)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGemini 2.0 ProGranite 3.1 2b Instruct
Aider Polyglot35.6%—
LiveBench Coding63.5%—
LMArena Coding—1149

Reasoning Too close to call

Gemini 2.0 Pro: 22.3 (#198), Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 22.0 (#209)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGemini 2.0 ProGranite 3.1 2b Instruct
EnigmaEval0.7%—
LiveBench Reasoning60.1%—
LMArena Hard Prompts—1138
LiveBench Data Analysis68%—
Epoch Capabilities Index135.06—
LiveBench65.1%—

Math Gemini 2.0 Pro leads

Gemini 2.0 Pro: 39.7 (#100), Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 33.1 (#206)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGemini 2.0 ProGranite 3.1 2b Instruct
LiveBench Math71%—
LMArena Math—1159
MATH Level 583.5%—

Knowledge Gemini 2.0 Pro leads

Gemini 2.0 Pro: 36.5 (#167), Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 30.8 (#224)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGemini 2.0 ProGranite 3.1 2b Instruct
GPQA Diamond65.7%—
Confabulations18.4%—
LMArena Expert—1131

Multilingual Not comparable

Gemini 2.0 Pro: —, Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 29.1 (#269)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGemini 2.0 ProGranite 3.1 2b Instruct
LMArena Non-English—1068
LMArena Chinese—1139
LMArena Russian—1063

Instruction Following Gemini 2.0 Pro leads

Gemini 2.0 Pro: 75.5 (#59), Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 57.7 (#264)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGemini 2.0 ProGranite 3.1 2b Instruct
LiveBench Instruction Following83.4%—
LMArena Instruction Following—1116

Long Context Granite 3.1 2b Instruct leads

Gemini 2.0 Pro: 29.2 (#292), Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 35.0 (#244)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGemini 2.0 ProGranite 3.1 2b Instruct
Fiction.LiveBench41.7%—
LMArena Longer Query—1155

Writing & Preference Gemini 2.0 Pro leads

Gemini 2.0 Pro: 52.7 (#165), Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 34.1 (#274)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGemini 2.0 ProGranite 3.1 2b Instruct
LMArena Text—1127
LMArena Creative Writing—1116
LMArena Multi-Turn—1099
LiveBench Language44.9%—

Frequently asked questions

Is Gemini 2.0 Pro better than Granite 3.1 2b Instruct?

Gemini 2.0 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.1 to 33.2 on the Noometry Index.

Is Gemini 2.0 Pro or Granite 3.1 2b Instruct better for coding?

Gemini 2.0 Pro scores higher on coding benchmarks: 37.8 versus 33.4 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Gemini 2.0 Pro and Granite 3.1 2b Instruct share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 2.0 Pro has 14 scored results on Noometry and Granite 3.1 2b Instruct has 12.

Related comparisons

Go deeper