Model comparison
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview vs Llama 3.2 90B
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview is the stronger model overall, scoring 56.7 to 27.5 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 6 shared benchmarks.
Google
MetaSummary
- They share 6 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview scores higher in 5 categories and Llama 3.2 90B in 0 categories; 5 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads 62.1 to 11.1.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 95.6% for Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview 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 3.1 Pro Preview | Llama 3.2 90B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Meta | |
| Noometry Index | 56.7 | 27.5 |
| Released | 2026-02-19 | 2024-09-24 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 1.05M | — |
| Max output | 66K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $2 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $12 | — |
| Results tracked | 71 | 9 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Not comparable
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 42.5 (#99), Llama 3.2 90B: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview | Llama 3.2 90B |
|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench Verified | 75.6% | — |
| DeepSWE | 11.7% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1447 | — |
| SciCode | 58.9% | — |
| GSO | 22.6% | — |
| WeirdML | 72.1% | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1484 | — |
| MirrorCode | 8.9% | — |
| ALE-Bench | 1,161 | — |
| AlgoTune | 2.02 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 37.7 (#34), Llama 3.2 90B: 30.0 (#80)
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview | Llama 3.2 90B |
|---|---|---|
| BALROG | 57% | 27.3% |
| Terminal-Bench | 80.2% | — |
| APEX-Agents | 35.3% | — |
| τ²-bench Banking | 26% | — |
| DeepResearch Bench | 47.8% | — |
| PostTrainBench | 22% | — |
| 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 3.2 90B: 21.7 (#217)
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview | Llama 3.2 90B |
|---|---|---|
| EnigmaEval | 36.8% | 0.4% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 154.77 | 125.5 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 77.1% | — |
| SimpleBench | 79.6% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 97.4% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 98% | — |
| CritPt | 17.7% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 55% | — |
| Thematic Generalization | 79.4% | — |
| EBR-Bench | 14.3% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1485 | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 34% | — |
| DTBench | 97.1% | — |
| LMCA | 53.8% | — |
| ForecastBench | 59 | — |
Math Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 62.1 (#34), Llama 3.2 90B: 11.1 (#308)
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview | Llama 3.2 90B |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 95.6% | 2.6% |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 59.6% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 26.8% | — |
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | 86.5% | — |
| ProofBench | 26% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1485 | — |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 39.4% |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 36.9% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 16.7% | — |
Knowledge Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 71.8 (#3), Llama 3.2 90B: 21.7 (#274)
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview | Llama 3.2 90B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 94.4% | 41% |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 46.4% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | 73.5% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 10.4% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1485 | — |
| MMLU | — | 80.3% |
Multimodal Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 37.9 (#69), Llama 3.2 90B: 25.4 (#124)
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview | Llama 3.2 90B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1296 | 1000 |
| GeoBench | — | 52% |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | 26.5% | — |
| Furniture Assembly | 26.7% | — |
| LMArena Document | 1444 | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 57.0 (#12), Llama 3.2 90B: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview | Llama 3.2 90B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1477 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1529 | — |
| LMArena French | 1487 | — |
| LMArena German | 1491 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1493 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1455 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1498 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1479 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 77.0 (#32), Llama 3.2 90B: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview | Llama 3.2 90B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1466 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 47.4 (#18), Llama 3.2 90B: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview | Llama 3.2 90B |
|---|---|---|
| CL-bench | 20.8% | — |
| CL-bench Life | 16.9% | — |
| LMArena Longer Query | 1483 | — |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 66.1 (#37), Llama 3.2 90B: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview | Llama 3.2 90B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1481 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1482 | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1491 | — |
| EQ-Bench 4 | 1142 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1488 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview better than Llama 3.2 90B?
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview is the stronger model overall, scoring 56.7 to 27.5 on the Noometry Index.
How many benchmarks do Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview and Llama 3.2 90B share?
6 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview has 71 scored results on Noometry and Llama 3.2 90B has 9.