Model comparison
Gemma 1.1 2b IT vs Llama 3.1-70B
Gemma 1.1 2b IT and Llama 3.1-70B score almost the same on the Noometry Index (29.3 vs 29.6), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Last verified . 14 shared benchmarks.
Google
MetaSummary
- They share 14 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 1.1 2b IT scores higher in 2 categories and Llama 3.1-70B in 6 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Gemma 1.1 2b IT leads 30.8 to 13.5.
Side by side
| Gemma 1.1 2b IT | Llama 3.1-70B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Meta | |
| Noometry Index | 29.3 | 29.6 |
| Released | — | 2024-07-23 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | — | 128K |
| Max output | — | 4K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.40 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $0.40 |
| Results tracked | 16 | 35 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Too close to call
Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 30.1 (#299), Llama 3.1-70B: 30.3 (#296)
| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 2b IT | Llama 3.1-70B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1034 | 1260 |
| WeirdML | — | 9% |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 46.1% |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 54.8% |
| HumanEval+ | 17.7% | — |
| MBPP+ | 23.3% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Gemma 1.1 2b IT: —, Llama 3.1-70B: 25.1 (#112)
| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 2b IT | Llama 3.1-70B |
|---|---|---|
| TheAgentCompany | — | 6.9% |
| BALROG | — | 27.9% |
Reasoning Llama 3.1-70B leads
Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 19.1 (#270), Llama 3.1-70B: 21.6 (#220)
| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 2b IT | Llama 3.1-70B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1005 | 1241 |
| DTBench | — | 60% |
| LMCA | — | 14.8% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 125.92 |
Math Gemma 1.1 2b IT leads
Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 30.8 (#232), Llama 3.1-70B: 13.5 (#304)
| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 2b IT | Llama 3.1-70B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1047 | 1252 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 3.6% |
| Omni-MATH | — | 21% |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 36.7% |
Knowledge Gemma 1.1 2b IT leads
Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 26.5 (#258), Llama 3.1-70B: 24.2 (#269)
| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 2b IT | Llama 3.1-70B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 970 | 1209 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 44.2% |
| MMLU-Pro | — | 65.3% |
| GPQA (HELM) | — | 42.6% |
| MMLU | — | 80.1% |
Multilingual Llama 3.1-70B leads
Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 24.6 (#289), Llama 3.1-70B: 38.8 (#225)
| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 2b IT | Llama 3.1-70B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 988 | 1219 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1012 | 1215 |
| LMArena German | 944 | 1222 |
| LMArena Korean | 899 | 1140 |
| LMArena Russian | 990 | 1234 |
| LMArena French | — | 1261 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1132 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1253 |
Instruction Following Llama 3.1-70B leads
Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 49.9 (#299), Llama 3.1-70B: 65.3 (#223)
| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 2b IT | Llama 3.1-70B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 992 | 1231 |
| IFEval | — | 82.1% |
Long Context Llama 3.1-70B leads
Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 30.6 (#286), Llama 3.1-70B: 37.6 (#214)
| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 2b IT | Llama 3.1-70B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1003 | 1241 |
Writing & Preference Llama 3.1-70B leads
Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 25.1 (#306), Llama 3.1-70B: 35.4 (#267)
| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 2b IT | Llama 3.1-70B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1022 | 1261 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 998 | 1232 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 959 | 1256 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 784 |
| WildBench | — | 75.8% |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemma 1.1 2b IT better than Llama 3.1-70B?
Gemma 1.1 2b IT and Llama 3.1-70B score almost the same on the Noometry Index (29.3 vs 29.6), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Is Gemma 1.1 2b IT or Llama 3.1-70B better for coding?
They score almost the same on coding (30.1 vs 30.3); test both on your own repository before choosing.
How many benchmarks do Gemma 1.1 2b IT and Llama 3.1-70B share?
14 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 1.1 2b IT has 16 scored results on Noometry and Llama 3.1-70B has 35.