Model comparison
Gemini 2.5 Pro vs Llama 3.2 90B
Gemini 2.5 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.0 to 27.5 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 8 shared benchmarks.
Google
MetaSummary
- They share 8 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 2.5 Pro scores higher in 4 categories and Llama 3.2 90B in 1 category; 4 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Gemini 2.5 Pro leads 56.0 to 21.7.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 84.7% for Gemini 2.5 Pro and 2.6% for Llama 3.2 90B.
- Llama 3.2 90B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Gemini 2.5 Pro | Llama 3.2 90B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Meta | |
| Noometry Index | 45.0 | 27.5 |
| Released | 2025-03-25 | 2024-09-24 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 1.05M | — |
| Max output | 66K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $1.25 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $10 | — |
| Results tracked | 78 | 9 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Not comparable
Gemini 2.5 Pro: 42.4 (#101), Llama 3.2 90B: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Llama 3.2 90B |
|---|---|---|
| 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% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 85.9% | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1452 | — |
| CadEval | 64% | — |
| ALE-Bench | 785.52 | — |
| AlgoTune | 1.51 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Too close to call
Gemini 2.5 Pro: 29.2 (#88), Llama 3.2 90B: 30.0 (#80)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Llama 3.2 90B |
|---|---|---|
| BALROG | 43.3% | 27.3% |
| Terminal-Bench | 32.6% | — |
| 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 (#99), Llama 3.2 90B: 21.7 (#217)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Llama 3.2 90B |
|---|---|---|
| EnigmaEval | 5.6% | 0.4% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 145.32 | 125.5 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 4.9% | — |
| SimpleBench | 62.4% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 70.3% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 41% | — |
| CritPt | 2% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 20% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 89.8% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1455 | — |
| DTBench | 82.4% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 79.9% | — |
| LMCA | 34.8% | — |
| ForecastBench | 61.3 | — |
| LiveBench | 82.3% | — |
Math Gemini 2.5 Pro leads
Gemini 2.5 Pro: 32.5 (#213), Llama 3.2 90B: 11.1 (#308)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Llama 3.2 90B |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 84.7% | 2.6% |
| MATH Level 5 | 95.9% | 39.4% |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 24.6% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 0% | — |
| Omni-MATH | 41.6% | — |
| LiveBench Math | 90.2% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1450 | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 14.1% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 4.2% | — |
Knowledge Gemini 2.5 Pro leads
Gemini 2.5 Pro: 56.0 (#46), Llama 3.2 90B: 21.7 (#274)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Llama 3.2 90B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 85.3% | 41% |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 21.6% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | 86.3% | — |
| Confabulations | 10.6% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 7% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 74.9% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1452 | — |
| MMLU | — | 80.3% |
Multimodal Gemini 2.5 Pro leads
Gemini 2.5 Pro: 45.2 (#18), Llama 3.2 90B: 25.4 (#124)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Llama 3.2 90B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1263 | 1000 |
| GeoBench | 86% | 52% |
| VPCT | 48% | — |
| LMArena Document | 1421 | — |
| SpatialViz-Bench | 44.7% | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
Gemini 2.5 Pro: 55.3 (#31), Llama 3.2 90B: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Llama 3.2 90B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1451 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1507 | — |
| LMArena French | 1472 | — |
| LMArena German | 1487 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1461 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1434 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1461 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1473 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Gemini 2.5 Pro: 75.0 (#75), Llama 3.2 90B: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Llama 3.2 90B |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 80.6% | — |
| IFEval | 84% | — |
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1437 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
Gemini 2.5 Pro: 59.8 (#5), Llama 3.2 90B: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Llama 3.2 90B |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | 91.7% | — |
| LMArena Longer Query | 1449 | — |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Gemini 2.5 Pro: 63.7 (#62), Llama 3.2 90B: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Llama 3.2 90B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1458 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1454 | — |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 83.8% | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1421 | — |
| WildBench | 85.7% | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1453 | — |
| LiveBench Language | 67.8% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemini 2.5 Pro better than Llama 3.2 90B?
Gemini 2.5 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.0 to 27.5 on the Noometry Index.
How many benchmarks do Gemini 2.5 Pro and Llama 3.2 90B share?
8 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 2.5 Pro has 78 scored results on Noometry and Llama 3.2 90B has 9.