Model comparison
Gemini 2.0 Pro vs Llama 13b
Gemini 2.0 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.1 to 24.4 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 1 shared benchmarks.
Google
MetaSummary
- They share 1 benchmark with published results for both. Gemini 2.0 Pro scores higher in 5 categories and Llama 13b in 0 categories; 5 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Gemini 2.0 Pro leads 52.7 to 13.8.
- Llama 13b has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Gemini 2.0 Pro | Llama 13b | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Meta | |
| Noometry Index | 39.1 | 24.4 |
| Released | 2025-02-05 | 2023-02-24 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | — | — |
| Max output | — | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Results tracked | 14 | 21 |
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), Llama 13b: 21.4 (#337)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Llama 13b |
|---|---|---|
| Aider Polyglot | 35.6% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 63.5% | — |
| LMArena Coding | — | 683 |
Reasoning Gemini 2.0 Pro leads
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 22.3 (#198), Llama 13b: 14.0 (#329)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Llama 13b |
|---|---|---|
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 135.06 | 100.58 |
| EnigmaEval | 0.7% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 60.1% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 728 |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 68% | — |
| BIG-Bench Hard | — | 37.9% |
| HellaSwag | — | 79.2% |
| LAMBADA | — | 75.2% |
| LiveBench | 65.1% | — |
| PIQA | — | 80.1% |
| WinoGrande | — | 73% |
Math Gemini 2.0 Pro leads
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 39.7 (#100), Llama 13b: 26.7 (#256)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Llama 13b |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Math | 71% | — |
| LMArena Math | — | 838 |
| MATH Level 5 | 83.5% | — |
| GSM8K | — | 20.6% |
Knowledge Not comparable
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 36.5 (#167), Llama 13b: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Llama 13b |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 65.7% | — |
| Confabulations | 18.4% | — |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | — | 52.7% |
| BoolQ | — | 78.7% |
| MMLU | — | 47.7% |
| OpenBookQA | — | 56.4% |
| TriviaQA | — | 77.9% |
Multimodal Not comparable
Gemini 2.0 Pro: —, Llama 13b: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Llama 13b |
|---|---|---|
| ScienceQA | — | 43.3% |
Multilingual Not comparable
Gemini 2.0 Pro: —, Llama 13b: 16.6 (#297)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Llama 13b |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 819 |
Instruction Following Gemini 2.0 Pro leads
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 75.5 (#59), Llama 13b: 36.7 (#305)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Llama 13b |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 83.4% | — |
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 781 |
Long Context Not comparable
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 29.2 (#292), Llama 13b: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Llama 13b |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | 41.7% | — |
Writing & Preference Gemini 2.0 Pro leads
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 52.7 (#165), Llama 13b: 13.8 (#312)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Llama 13b |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 834 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 794 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 753 |
| LiveBench Language | 44.9% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemini 2.0 Pro better than Llama 13b?
Gemini 2.0 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.1 to 24.4 on the Noometry Index.
Is Gemini 2.0 Pro or Llama 13b better for coding?
Gemini 2.0 Pro scores higher on coding benchmarks: 37.8 versus 21.4 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Gemini 2.0 Pro and Llama 13b share?
1 benchmark has published results for both models. Gemini 2.0 Pro has 14 scored results on Noometry and Llama 13b has 21.