Model comparison
Gemini 2.0 Pro vs Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct
Gemini 2.0 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.1 to 30.6 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 12 shared benchmarks.
Google
MetaSummary
- They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 2.0 Pro scores higher in 7 categories and Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct in 0 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Gemini 2.0 Pro leads 39.7 to 15.3.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is MATH Level 5: 83.5% for Gemini 2.0 Pro and 41.6% for Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct.
- Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Gemini 2.0 Pro | Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Meta | |
| Noometry Index | 39.1 | 30.6 |
| Released | 2025-02-05 | 2024-12-06 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | — | 128K |
| Max output | — | 4K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.10 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $0.32 |
| Results tracked | 14 | 43 |
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-3.3-70B-Instruct: 31.0 (#290)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Coding | 63.5% | 36.6% |
| Aider Polyglot | 35.6% | — |
| SciCode | — | 26% |
| WeirdML | — | 14.4% |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 46.9% |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1268 |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 57.5% |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Gemini 2.0 Pro: —, Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct: 25.8 (#105)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 31.9% |
| BALROG | — | 23% |
Reasoning Gemini 2.0 Pro leads
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 22.3 (#198), Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct: 14.1 (#327)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Reasoning | 60.1% | 50.8% |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 68% | 49.5% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 135.06 | 127.33 |
| LiveBench | 65.1% | 50.2% |
| SimpleBench | — | 19.9% |
| CritPt | — | 0% |
| EnigmaEval | 0.7% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1257 |
| DTBench | — | 59.5% |
| LMCA | — | 17.5% |
| ForecastBench | — | 58.6 |
Math Gemini 2.0 Pro leads
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 39.7 (#100), Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct: 15.3 (#298)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Math | 71% | 42.2% |
| MATH Level 5 | 83.5% | 41.6% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 5.1% |
| LMArena Math | — | 1267 |
Knowledge Gemini 2.0 Pro leads
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 36.5 (#167), Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct: 30.6 (#226)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 65.7% | 47.4% |
| Confabulations | 18.4% | 22.8% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 4.1% |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1225 |
| MMLU | — | 86.3% |
Multilingual Not comparable
Gemini 2.0 Pro: —, Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct: 39.9 (#220)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1236 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1217 |
| LMArena French | — | 1281 |
| LMArena German | — | 1251 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1150 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1143 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1252 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1270 |
Instruction Following Gemini 2.0 Pro leads
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 75.5 (#59), Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct: 71.1 (#157)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 83.4% | 82.7% |
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1242 |
Long Context Gemini 2.0 Pro leads
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 29.2 (#292), Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct: 26.4 (#295)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | 41.7% | 33.3% |
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1256 |
Writing & Preference Gemini 2.0 Pro leads
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 52.7 (#165), Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct: 47.6 (#207)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Language | 44.9% | 39.2% |
| LMArena Text | — | 1274 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1250 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1280 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemini 2.0 Pro better than Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct?
Gemini 2.0 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.1 to 30.6 on the Noometry Index.
Is Gemini 2.0 Pro or Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct better for coding?
Gemini 2.0 Pro scores higher on coding benchmarks: 37.8 versus 31.0 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Gemini 2.0 Pro and Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct share?
12 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 2.0 Pro has 14 scored results on Noometry and Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct has 43.