Model comparison
Gemini 2.5 Pro vs Llama 3.2 3B
Gemini 2.5 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 44.9 to 28.4 on the Noometry Index. Llama 3.2 3B costs 29× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Gemini 2.5 Pro's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 15 shared benchmarks.
Google
MetaSummary
- They share 15 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 2.5 Pro scores higher in 9 categories and Llama 3.2 3B in 0 categories; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Gemini 2.5 Pro leads 63.9 to 24.9.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is BALROG: 43.3% for Gemini 2.5 Pro and 10.1% for Llama 3.2 3B.
- Llama 3.2 3B is cheaper at $0.05 / $0.33 per million input/output tokens, against $1.25 / $10 for Gemini 2.5 Pro.
- Gemini 2.5 Pro accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 131K.
- Llama 3.2 3B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Gemini 2.5 Pro | Llama 3.2 3B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Meta | |
| Noometry Index | 44.9 | 28.4 |
| Released | 2025-03-25 | 2024-09-24 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 1.05M | 131K |
| Max output | 66K | 118K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $1.25 | $0.05 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $10 | $0.33 |
| Results tracked | 78 | 18 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Gemini 2.5 Pro leads
Gemini 2.5 Pro: 42.8 (#86), Llama 3.2 3B: 27.1 (#314)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Llama 3.2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1452 | 1098 |
| SWE-bench Verified | 57.6% | — |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 53.6% | — |
| Aider Polyglot | 83.1% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1227 | — |
| SciCode | 42.8% | — |
| GSO | 3.9% | — |
| WeirdML | 54% | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 23.4% |
| LiveBench Coding | 85.9% | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 28.3% |
| CadEval | 64% | — |
| ALE-Bench | 785.52 | — |
| AlgoTune | 1.51 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Gemini 2.5 Pro leads
Gemini 2.5 Pro: 29.1 (#81), Llama 3.2 3B: 19.9 (#135)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Llama 3.2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| BALROG | 43.3% | 10.1% |
| Terminal-Bench | 32.6% | — |
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 21.9% |
| GDPval | 23.3% | — |
| Remote Labor Index | 0.8% | — |
| TheAgentCompany | 30.3% | — |
| τ²-bench Banking | 13.7% | — |
| DeepResearch Bench | 42.8% | — |
| LMArena Search | 1142 | — |
| METR Time Horizons | 55.4% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 573.64 | — |
Reasoning Gemini 2.5 Pro leads
Gemini 2.5 Pro: 28.8 (#85), Llama 3.2 3B: 20.1 (#225)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Llama 3.2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1455 | 1095 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 4.9% | — |
| SimpleBench | 62.4% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 70.3% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 41% | — |
| CritPt | 2% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 20% | — |
| EnigmaEval | 5.6% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 89.8% | — |
| DTBench | 82.4% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 79.9% | — |
| LMCA | 34.8% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 145.32 | — |
| ForecastBench | 61.3 | — |
| LiveBench | 82.3% | — |
Math Gemini 2.5 Pro leads
Gemini 2.5 Pro: 31.9 (#191), Llama 3.2 3B: 29.9 (#213)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Llama 3.2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1450 | 1126 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 24.6% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 0% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 84.7% | — |
| Omni-MATH | 41.6% | — |
| LiveBench Math | 90.2% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 95.9% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 14.1% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 4.2% | — |
Knowledge Gemini 2.5 Pro leads
Gemini 2.5 Pro: 55.8 (#41), Llama 3.2 3B: 29.1 (#232)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Llama 3.2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1452 | 1090 |
| GPQA Diamond | 85.3% | — |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 21.6% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | 86.3% | — |
| Confabulations | 10.6% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 7% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 74.9% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Gemini 2.5 Pro: 44.5 (#16), Llama 3.2 3B: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Llama 3.2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1263 | — |
| GeoBench | 86% | — |
| VPCT | 48% | — |
| LMArena Document | 1421 | — |
| SpatialViz-Bench | 44.7% | — |
Multilingual Gemini 2.5 Pro leads
Gemini 2.5 Pro: 55.5 (#30), Llama 3.2 3B: 26.4 (#276)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Llama 3.2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1452 | 1019 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1507 | 1017 |
| LMArena German | 1487 | 1056 |
| LMArena Russian | 1460 | 949 |
| LMArena French | 1473 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1462 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1435 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1473 | — |
Instruction Following Gemini 2.5 Pro leads
Gemini 2.5 Pro: 75.2 (#71), Llama 3.2 3B: 56.3 (#270)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Llama 3.2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1436 | 1089 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 80.6% | — |
| IFEval | 84% | — |
Long Context Gemini 2.5 Pro leads
Gemini 2.5 Pro: 59.7 (#5), Llama 3.2 3B: 33.4 (#256)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Llama 3.2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1449 | 1101 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | 91.7% | — |
Writing & Preference Gemini 2.5 Pro leads
Gemini 2.5 Pro: 63.9 (#60), Llama 3.2 3B: 24.9 (#302)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Llama 3.2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1458 | 1110 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1453 | 1094 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1421 | 595 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1453 | 1105 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 83.8% | — |
| WildBench | 85.7% | — |
| LiveBench Language | 67.8% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemini 2.5 Pro better than Llama 3.2 3B?
Gemini 2.5 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 44.9 to 28.4 on the Noometry Index. Llama 3.2 3B costs 29× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Gemini 2.5 Pro's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, Gemini 2.5 Pro or Llama 3.2 3B?
Llama 3.2 3B is cheaper. It lists at $0.05 per million input tokens and $0.33 per million output tokens; Gemini 2.5 Pro lists at $1.25 and $10.
Is Gemini 2.5 Pro or Llama 3.2 3B better for coding?
Gemini 2.5 Pro scores higher on coding benchmarks: 42.8 versus 27.1 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Gemini 2.5 Pro does, with 1.05M tokens against 131K.
How many benchmarks do Gemini 2.5 Pro and Llama 3.2 3B share?
15 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 2.5 Pro has 78 scored results on Noometry and Llama 3.2 3B has 18.