Model comparison
Gemini 2.5 Flash vs Llama 3.1 Nemotron 51b Instruct
Gemini 2.5 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.3 to 35.9 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 12 shared benchmarks.
Google
NVIDIASummary
- They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 2.5 Flash scores higher in 7 categories and Llama 3.1 Nemotron 51b Instruct in 1 category; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in multilingual, where Gemini 2.5 Flash leads 52.3 to 36.1.
- Llama 3.1 Nemotron 51b Instruct has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Gemini 2.5 Flash | Llama 3.1 Nemotron 51b Instruct | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | NVIDIA | |
| Noometry Index | 39.3 | 35.9 |
| Released | 2025-04-17 | — |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 1.05M | — |
| Max output | 66K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.30 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $2.50 | — |
| Results tracked | 54 | 12 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Too close to call
Gemini 2.5 Flash: 35.8 (#220), Llama 3.1 Nemotron 51b Instruct: 35.6 (#222)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash | Llama 3.1 Nemotron 51b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1424 | 1223 |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 28.7% | — |
| Aider Polyglot | 55.1% | — |
| WeirdML | 41.9% | — |
| ALE-Bench | 661.88 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Gemini 2.5 Flash: 30.8 (#74), Llama 3.1 Nemotron 51b Instruct: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash | Llama 3.1 Nemotron 51b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | 17.1% | — |
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 56.2% | — |
| TheAgentCompany | 41.1% | — |
| BALROG | 33.5% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 548.84 | — |
Reasoning Llama 3.1 Nemotron 51b Instruct leads
Gemini 2.5 Flash: 18.1 (#286), Llama 3.1 Nemotron 51b Instruct: 23.5 (#177)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash | Llama 3.1 Nemotron 51b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1422 | 1203 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 2.5% | — |
| SimpleBench | 41.2% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 56.8% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 33.3% | — |
| CritPt | 1.1% | — |
| EnigmaEval | 2.7% | — |
| DTBench | 76.5% | — |
| LMCA | 27.5% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 143.03 | — |
| ForecastBench | 60.6 | — |
Math Gemini 2.5 Flash leads
Gemini 2.5 Flash: 39.9 (#98), Llama 3.1 Nemotron 51b Instruct: 34.6 (#193)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash | Llama 3.1 Nemotron 51b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1415 | 1230 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 73.1% | — |
| Omni-MATH | 38.5% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 4.8% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 4.2% | — |
Knowledge Gemini 2.5 Flash leads
Gemini 2.5 Flash: 36.4 (#168), Llama 3.1 Nemotron 51b Instruct: 31.9 (#218)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash | Llama 3.1 Nemotron 51b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1426 | 1167 |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 12.1% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | 63.9% | — |
| Confabulations | 16.8% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 7.8% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 39% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Gemini 2.5 Flash: 41.8 (#32), Llama 3.1 Nemotron 51b Instruct: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash | Llama 3.1 Nemotron 51b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1253 | — |
| GeoBench | 76% | — |
| VPCT | 46.2% | — |
| SpatialViz-Bench | 36.9% | — |
Multilingual Gemini 2.5 Flash leads
Gemini 2.5 Flash: 52.3 (#88), Llama 3.1 Nemotron 51b Instruct: 36.1 (#241)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash | Llama 3.1 Nemotron 51b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1409 | 1181 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1450 | 1180 |
| LMArena Russian | 1415 | 1187 |
| LMArena French | 1433 | — |
| LMArena German | 1418 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1405 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1385 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1421 | — |
Instruction Following Gemini 2.5 Flash leads
Gemini 2.5 Flash: 75.7 (#54), Llama 3.1 Nemotron 51b Instruct: 62.9 (#233)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash | Llama 3.1 Nemotron 51b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1405 | 1201 |
| IFEval | 89.8% | — |
Long Context Gemini 2.5 Flash leads
Gemini 2.5 Flash: 47.5 (#17), Llama 3.1 Nemotron 51b Instruct: 36.5 (#230)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash | Llama 3.1 Nemotron 51b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1419 | 1205 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | 77.8% | — |
Writing & Preference Gemini 2.5 Flash leads
Gemini 2.5 Flash: 53.8 (#157), Llama 3.1 Nemotron 51b Instruct: 43.4 (#229)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash | Llama 3.1 Nemotron 51b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1417 | 1228 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1400 | 1213 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1408 | 1227 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 76.5% | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1137 | — |
| WildBench | 81.7% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemini 2.5 Flash better than Llama 3.1 Nemotron 51b Instruct?
Gemini 2.5 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.3 to 35.9 on the Noometry Index.
Is Gemini 2.5 Flash or Llama 3.1 Nemotron 51b Instruct better for coding?
They score almost the same on coding (35.8 vs 35.6); test both on your own repository before choosing.
How many benchmarks do Gemini 2.5 Flash and Llama 3.1 Nemotron 51b Instruct share?
12 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 2.5 Flash has 54 scored results on Noometry and Llama 3.1 Nemotron 51b Instruct has 12.