Noometry

Model comparison

Gemini 2.0 Pro vs Llama 3.1-70B

Gemini 2.0 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.6 to 29.4 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 3 shared benchmarks.

Gemini 2.0 Pro Google

38.6

Rank #171 Confirmed

Llama 3.1-70B Meta

29.4

Rank #299 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 3 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 2.0 Pro scores higher in 6 categories and Llama 3.1-70B in 1 category; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where Gemini 2.0 Pro leads 37.1 to 12.7.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is MATH Level 5: 83.5% for Gemini 2.0 Pro and 36.7% for Llama 3.1-70B.
  • Llama 3.1-70B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Gemini 2.0 ProLlama 3.1-70B
ProviderGoogleMeta
Noometry Index38.629.4
Released2025-02-052024-07-23
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window—128K
Max output—4K
Input $ / M tokens—$0.40
Output $ / M tokens—$0.40
Results tracked1435

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: 37.4 (#182), Llama 3.1-70B: 29.8 (#292)

BenchmarkGemini 2.0 ProLlama 3.1-70B
Aider Polyglot35.6%—
WeirdML—9%
BigCodeBench Instruct—46.1%
LiveBench Coding63.5%—
LMArena Coding—1260
BigCodeBench Complete—54.8%

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Gemini 2.0 Pro: —, Llama 3.1-70B: 24.9 (#104)

BenchmarkGemini 2.0 ProLlama 3.1-70B
TheAgentCompany—6.9%
BALROG—27.9%

Reasoning Too close to call

Gemini 2.0 Pro: 21.6 (#194), Llama 3.1-70B: 20.8 (#215)

BenchmarkGemini 2.0 ProLlama 3.1-70B
Epoch Capabilities Index135.06125.91
EnigmaEval0.7%—
LiveBench Reasoning60.1%—
LMArena Hard Prompts—1241
DTBench—60%
LiveBench Data Analysis68%—
LMCA—14.8%
LiveBench65.1%—

Math Gemini 2.0 Pro leads

Gemini 2.0 Pro: 37.1 (#101), Llama 3.1-70B: 12.7 (#298)

BenchmarkGemini 2.0 ProLlama 3.1-70B
MATH Level 583.5%36.7%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—3.6%
Omni-MATH—21%
LiveBench Math71%—
LMArena Math—1252

Knowledge Gemini 2.0 Pro leads

Gemini 2.0 Pro: 36.5 (#156), Llama 3.1-70B: 24.1 (#264)

BenchmarkGemini 2.0 ProLlama 3.1-70B
GPQA Diamond65.7%44.2%
MMLU-Pro—65.3%
Confabulations18.4%—
GPQA (HELM)—42.6%
LMArena Expert—1209
MMLU—80.1%

Multilingual Not comparable

Gemini 2.0 Pro: —, Llama 3.1-70B: 38.9 (#220)

BenchmarkGemini 2.0 ProLlama 3.1-70B
LMArena Non-English—1219
LMArena Chinese—1215
LMArena French—1260
LMArena German—1222
LMArena Japanese—1132
LMArena Korean—1140
LMArena Russian—1234
LMArena Spanish—1253

Instruction Following Gemini 2.0 Pro leads

Gemini 2.0 Pro: 75.6 (#57), Llama 3.1-70B: 65.5 (#218)

BenchmarkGemini 2.0 ProLlama 3.1-70B
LiveBench Instruction Following83.4%—
IFEval—82.1%
LMArena Instruction Following—1231

Long Context Llama 3.1-70B leads

Gemini 2.0 Pro: 29.1 (#287), Llama 3.1-70B: 37.6 (#208)

BenchmarkGemini 2.0 ProLlama 3.1-70B
Fiction.LiveBench41.7%—
LMArena Longer Query—1241

Writing & Preference Gemini 2.0 Pro leads

Gemini 2.0 Pro: 52.7 (#164), Llama 3.1-70B: 35.6 (#262)

BenchmarkGemini 2.0 ProLlama 3.1-70B
LMArena Text—1261
LMArena Creative Writing—1232
EQ-Bench Creative Writing—784
WildBench—75.8%
LMArena Multi-Turn—1256
LiveBench Language44.9%—

Frequently asked questions

Is Gemini 2.0 Pro better than Llama 3.1-70B?

Gemini 2.0 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.6 to 29.4 on the Noometry Index.

Is Gemini 2.0 Pro or Llama 3.1-70B better for coding?

Gemini 2.0 Pro scores higher on coding benchmarks: 37.4 versus 29.8 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Gemini 2.0 Pro and Llama 3.1-70B share?

3 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 2.0 Pro has 14 scored results on Noometry and Llama 3.1-70B has 35.

Related comparisons

Go deeper