Noometry

Model comparison

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview vs Llama 3.1-8B

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview is the stronger model overall, scoring 56.7 to 22.8 on the Noometry Index. Llama 3.1-8B costs 78× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 28 shared benchmarks.

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview Google

56.7

Rank #20 Confirmed

Llama 3.1-8B Meta

22.8

Rank #347 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 28 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview 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 knowledge, where Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads 71.8 to 8.0.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 95.6% for Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview 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 $2 / $12 for Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview.
  • Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview 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 3.1 Pro PreviewLlama 3.1-8B
ProviderGoogleMeta
Noometry Index56.722.8
Released2026-02-192024-07-23
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1.05M128K
Max output66K4K
Input $ / M tokens$2$0.05
Output $ / M tokens$12$0.08
Results tracked7143

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: 42.7 (#88), Llama 3.1-8B: 19.9 (#335)

BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Pro PreviewLlama 3.1-8B
SciCode58.9%13.2%
WeirdML72.1%1.7%
LMArena Coding14831195
SWE-bench Verified75.6%—
DeepSWE11.7%—
LMArena WebDev1446—
GSO22.6%—
BigCodeBench Instruct—32.8%
MirrorCode8.9%—
BigCodeBench Complete—40.5%
ALE-Bench1,161—
AlgoTune2.02—
HumanEval+—62.8%
MBPP+—55.6%

Agentic & Tool Use Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 37.7 (#33), Llama 3.1-8B: 22.3 (#123)

BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Pro PreviewLlama 3.1-8B
BALROG57%15.1%
Terminal-Bench80.2%—
APEX-Agents35.3%—
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard—25.8%
τ²-bench Banking26%—
DeepResearch Bench47.8%—
PostTrainBench22%—
ExploitBench26.1%—
GBAEval0.8%—
GDP.pdf17%—
LMArena Search1211—
METR Time Horizons77%—
Vending-Bench 23,774—

Reasoning Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 71.7 (#9), Llama 3.1-8B: 14.5 (#316)

BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Pro PreviewLlama 3.1-8B
CritPt17.7%0%
Chess Puzzles55%0%
LMArena Hard Prompts14841175
DTBench97.1%50.9%
LMCA53.8%5.4%
Epoch Capabilities Index154.92116.48
ARC-AGI-277.1%—
SimpleBench79.6%—
NYT Connections (extended)97.4%—
ARC-AGI-198%—
EnigmaEval36.8%—
Thematic Generalization79.4%—
EBR-Bench14.3%—
Mystery Game Puzzles34%—
ForecastBench59—
PIQA—81.2%

Math Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 61.8 (#28), Llama 3.1-8B: 9.5 (#311)

BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Pro PreviewLlama 3.1-8B
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202595.6%1.7%
LMArena Math14851179
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)59.6%—
FrontierMath Tier 426.8%—
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions86.5%—
ProofBench26%—
Omni-MATH—13.7%
MATH Level 5—22.9%
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)36.9%—
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)16.7%—
GSM8K—82.4%

Knowledge Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 71.8 (#3), Llama 3.1-8B: 8.0 (#302)

BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Pro PreviewLlama 3.1-8B
GPQA Diamond94.4%27%
LMArena Expert14841144
Humanity's Last Exam46.4%—
SimpleQA Verified73.5%—
MMLU-Pro—40.6%
Vectara Hallucination Rate10.4%—
GPQA (HELM)—24.7%
BoolQ—82.8%
MMLU—56.1%

Multimodal Not comparable

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 38.1 (#60), Llama 3.1-8B: —

BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Pro PreviewLlama 3.1-8B
LMArena Vision1296—
Blueprint-Bench 226.5%—
Furniture Assembly26.7%—
LMArena Document1444—

Multilingual Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 57.1 (#11), Llama 3.1-8B: 34.2 (#244)

BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Pro PreviewLlama 3.1-8B
LMArena Non-English14751148
LMArena Chinese15281151
LMArena French14881176
LMArena German14911144
LMArena Japanese14941061
LMArena Korean14581053
LMArena Russian14961158
LMArena Spanish14801169

Instruction Following Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 77.1 (#31), Llama 3.1-8B: 59.1 (#253)

BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Pro PreviewLlama 3.1-8B
LMArena Instruction Following14651159
IFEval—74.3%

Long Context Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 47.3 (#17), Llama 3.1-8B: 35.8 (#233)

BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Pro PreviewLlama 3.1-8B
LMArena Longer Query14821182
CL-bench20.8%—
CL-bench Life16.9%—

Writing & Preference Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 66.3 (#36), Llama 3.1-8B: 29.9 (#285)

BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Pro PreviewLlama 3.1-8B
LMArena Text14801187
LMArena Creative Writing14821154
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1491713
LMArena Multi-Turn14861172
WildBench—68.7%
EQ-Bench 41142—

Frequently asked questions

Is Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview better than Llama 3.1-8B?

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview is the stronger model overall, scoring 56.7 to 22.8 on the Noometry Index. Llama 3.1-8B costs 78× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview 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 3.1 Pro Preview lists at $2 and $12.

Is Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview or Llama 3.1-8B better for coding?

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview scores higher on coding benchmarks: 42.7 versus 19.9 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview does, with 1.05M tokens against 128K.

How many benchmarks do Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview and Llama 3.1-8B share?

28 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview has 71 scored results on Noometry and Llama 3.1-8B has 43.

Related comparisons

Go deeper