Model comparison
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview vs Llama 13b
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview is the stronger model overall, scoring 56.7 to 24.4 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 9 shared benchmarks.
Google
MetaSummary
- They share 9 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview scores higher in 6 categories and Llama 13b in 0 categories; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads 71.7 to 14.0.
- Llama 13b has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview | Llama 13b | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Meta | |
| Noometry Index | 56.7 | 24.4 |
| Released | 2026-02-19 | 2023-02-24 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 1.05M | — |
| Max output | 66K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $2 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $12 | — |
| Results tracked | 71 | 21 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 42.5 (#99), Llama 13b: 21.4 (#337)
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview | Llama 13b |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1484 | 683 |
| SWE-bench Verified | 75.6% | — |
| DeepSWE | 11.7% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1447 | — |
| SciCode | 58.9% | — |
| GSO | 22.6% | — |
| WeirdML | 72.1% | — |
| MirrorCode | 8.9% | — |
| ALE-Bench | 1,161 | — |
| AlgoTune | 2.02 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 37.7 (#34), Llama 13b: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview | Llama 13b |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | 80.2% | — |
| APEX-Agents | 35.3% | — |
| τ²-bench Banking | 26% | — |
| DeepResearch Bench | 47.8% | — |
| PostTrainBench | 22% | — |
| BALROG | 57% | — |
| ExploitBench | 26.1% | — |
| GBAEval | 0.8% | — |
| GDP.pdf | 17% | — |
| LMArena Search | 1211 | — |
| METR Time Horizons | 77% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 3,774 | — |
Reasoning Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 71.7 (#12), Llama 13b: 14.0 (#329)
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview | Llama 13b |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1485 | 728 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 154.77 | 100.58 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 77.1% | — |
| SimpleBench | 79.6% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 97.4% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 98% | — |
| CritPt | 17.7% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 55% | — |
| EnigmaEval | 36.8% | — |
| Thematic Generalization | 79.4% | — |
| EBR-Bench | 14.3% | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 34% | — |
| DTBench | 97.1% | — |
| LMCA | 53.8% | — |
| BIG-Bench Hard | — | 37.9% |
| ForecastBench | 59 | — |
| HellaSwag | — | 79.2% |
| LAMBADA | — | 75.2% |
| PIQA | — | 80.1% |
| WinoGrande | — | 73% |
Math Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 62.1 (#34), Llama 13b: 26.7 (#256)
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview | Llama 13b |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1485 | 838 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 59.6% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 26.8% | — |
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | 86.5% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 95.6% | — |
| ProofBench | 26% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 36.9% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 16.7% | — |
| GSM8K | — | 20.6% |
Knowledge Not comparable
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 71.8 (#3), Llama 13b: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview | Llama 13b |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 94.4% | — |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 46.4% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | 73.5% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 10.4% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1485 | — |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | — | 52.7% |
| BoolQ | — | 78.7% |
| MMLU | — | 47.7% |
| OpenBookQA | — | 56.4% |
| TriviaQA | — | 77.9% |
Multimodal Not comparable
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 37.9 (#69), Llama 13b: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview | Llama 13b |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1296 | — |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | 26.5% | — |
| Furniture Assembly | 26.7% | — |
| LMArena Document | 1444 | — |
| ScienceQA | — | 43.3% |
Multilingual Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 57.0 (#12), Llama 13b: 16.6 (#297)
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview | Llama 13b |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1477 | 819 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1529 | — |
| LMArena French | 1487 | — |
| LMArena German | 1491 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1493 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1455 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1498 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1479 | — |
Instruction Following Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 77.0 (#32), Llama 13b: 36.7 (#305)
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview | Llama 13b |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1466 | 781 |
Long Context Not comparable
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 47.4 (#18), Llama 13b: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview | Llama 13b |
|---|---|---|
| CL-bench | 20.8% | — |
| CL-bench Life | 16.9% | — |
| LMArena Longer Query | 1483 | — |
Writing & Preference Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 66.1 (#37), Llama 13b: 13.8 (#312)
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview | Llama 13b |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1481 | 834 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1482 | 794 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1488 | 753 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1491 | — |
| EQ-Bench 4 | 1142 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview better than Llama 13b?
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview is the stronger model overall, scoring 56.7 to 24.4 on the Noometry Index.
Is Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview or Llama 13b better for coding?
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview scores higher on coding benchmarks: 42.5 versus 21.4 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview and Llama 13b share?
9 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview has 71 scored results on Noometry and Llama 13b has 21.