Model comparison

Gemini 2.5 Flash vs Llama 3.1-8B

Gemini 2.5 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.0 to 22.8 on the Noometry Index. Llama 3.1-8B costs 15× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Gemini 2.5 Flash's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 31 shared benchmarks.

Gemini 2.5 Flash Google

39.0

Rank #162 Confirmed

Llama 3.1-8B Meta

22.8

Rank #347 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 31 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 2.5 Flash scores higher in 9 categories and Llama 3.1-8B in 0 categories; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where Gemini 2.5 Flash leads 38.1 to 9.5.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 73.1% for Gemini 2.5 Flash and 1.7% for Llama 3.1-8B.
  • Llama 3.1-8B is cheaper at $0.05 / $0.08 per million input/output tokens, against $0.30 / $2.50 for Gemini 2.5 Flash.
  • Gemini 2.5 Flash accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 128K.
  • Llama 3.1-8B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Gemini 2.5 Flash and Llama 3.1-8B specifications
Gemini 2.5 FlashLlama 3.1-8B
ProviderGoogleMeta
Noometry Index39.022.8
Released2025-04-172024-07-23
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1.05M128K
Max output66K4K
Input $ / M tokens$0.30$0.05
Output $ / M tokens$2.50$0.08
Results tracked5443

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

Category by category

Coding Gemini 2.5 Flash leads

Gemini 2.5 Flash: 35.5 (#210), Llama 3.1-8B: 19.9 (#335)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 FlashLlama 3.1-8B
WeirdML41.9%1.7%
LMArena Coding14241195
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)28.7%—
Aider Polyglot55.1%—
SciCode—13.2%
BigCodeBench Instruct—32.8%
BigCodeBench Complete—40.5%
ALE-Bench661.88—
HumanEval+—62.8%
MBPP+—55.6%

Agentic & Tool Use Gemini 2.5 Flash leads

Gemini 2.5 Flash: 30.6 (#67), Llama 3.1-8B: 22.3 (#123)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 FlashLlama 3.1-8B
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard56.2%25.8%
BALROG33.5%15.1%
Terminal-Bench17.1%—
TheAgentCompany41.1%—
Vending-Bench 2548.84—

Reasoning Gemini 2.5 Flash leads

Gemini 2.5 Flash: 18.2 (#271), Llama 3.1-8B: 14.5 (#316)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 FlashLlama 3.1-8B
CritPt1.1%0%
LMArena Hard Prompts14221175
DTBench76.5%50.9%
LMCA27.5%5.4%
Epoch Capabilities Index143.04116.48
ARC-AGI-22.5%—
SimpleBench41.2%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark56.8%—
ARC-AGI-133.3%—
Chess Puzzles—0%
EnigmaEval2.7%—
ForecastBench60.6—
PIQA—81.2%

Math Gemini 2.5 Flash leads

Gemini 2.5 Flash: 38.1 (#87), Llama 3.1-8B: 9.5 (#311)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 FlashLlama 3.1-8B
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202573.1%1.7%
Omni-MATH38.5%13.7%
LMArena Math14151179
MATH Level 5—22.9%
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)4.8%—
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)4.2%—
GSM8K—82.4%

Knowledge Gemini 2.5 Flash leads

Gemini 2.5 Flash: 36.1 (#162), Llama 3.1-8B: 8.0 (#302)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 FlashLlama 3.1-8B
MMLU-Pro63.9%40.6%
GPQA (HELM)39%24.7%
LMArena Expert14261144
GPQA Diamond—27%
Humanity's Last Exam12.1%—
Confabulations16.8%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate7.8%—
BoolQ—82.8%
MMLU—56.1%

Multimodal Not comparable

Gemini 2.5 Flash: 41.2 (#31), Llama 3.1-8B: —

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 FlashLlama 3.1-8B
LMArena Vision1254—
GeoBench76%—
VPCT46.2%—
SpatialViz-Bench36.9%—

Multilingual Gemini 2.5 Flash leads

Gemini 2.5 Flash: 52.5 (#83), Llama 3.1-8B: 34.2 (#244)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 FlashLlama 3.1-8B
LMArena Non-English14101148
LMArena Chinese14501151
LMArena French14331176
LMArena German14191144
LMArena Japanese14031061
LMArena Korean13851053
LMArena Russian14151158
LMArena Spanish14211169

Instruction Following Gemini 2.5 Flash leads

Gemini 2.5 Flash: 75.9 (#50), Llama 3.1-8B: 59.1 (#253)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 FlashLlama 3.1-8B
IFEval89.8%74.3%
LMArena Instruction Following14051159

Long Context Gemini 2.5 Flash leads

Gemini 2.5 Flash: 47.5 (#16), Llama 3.1-8B: 35.8 (#233)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 FlashLlama 3.1-8B
LMArena Longer Query14191182
Fiction.LiveBench77.8%—

Writing & Preference Gemini 2.5 Flash leads

Gemini 2.5 Flash: 54.0 (#153), Llama 3.1-8B: 29.9 (#285)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 FlashLlama 3.1-8B
LMArena Text14171187
LMArena Creative Writing14001154
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1137713
WildBench81.7%68.7%
LMArena Multi-Turn14081172
Short-Story Creative Writing76.5%—

Frequently asked questions

Is Gemini 2.5 Flash better than Llama 3.1-8B?

Gemini 2.5 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.0 to 22.8 on the Noometry Index. Llama 3.1-8B costs 15× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Gemini 2.5 Flash's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, Gemini 2.5 Flash or Llama 3.1-8B?

Llama 3.1-8B is cheaper. It lists at $0.05 per million input tokens and $0.08 per million output tokens; Gemini 2.5 Flash lists at $0.30 and $2.50.

Is Gemini 2.5 Flash or Llama 3.1-8B better for coding?

Gemini 2.5 Flash scores higher on coding benchmarks: 35.5 versus 19.9 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Gemini 2.5 Flash does, with 1.05M tokens against 128K.

How many benchmarks do Gemini 2.5 Flash and Llama 3.1-8B share?

31 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 2.5 Flash has 54 scored results on Noometry and Llama 3.1-8B has 43.

Related comparisons

Go deeper