Model comparison
Gemma 1.1 2b IT vs Llama 3.2 3B
Gemma 1.1 2b IT and Llama 3.2 3B score almost the same on the Noometry Index (28.8 vs 28.4), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Last verified . 13 shared benchmarks.
Google
MetaSummary
- They share 13 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 1.1 2b IT scores higher in 2 categories and Llama 3.2 3B in 6 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in instruction following, where Llama 3.2 3B leads 56.3 to 50.1.
Side by side
| Gemma 1.1 2b IT | Llama 3.2 3B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Meta | |
| Noometry Index | 28.8 | 28.4 |
| Released | — | 2024-09-24 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | — | 131K |
| Max output | — | 118K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.05 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $0.33 |
| Results tracked | 16 | 18 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Gemma 1.1 2b IT leads
Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 29.6 (#294), Llama 3.2 3B: 27.1 (#314)
| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 2b IT | Llama 3.2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1034 | 1098 |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 23.4% |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 28.3% |
| HumanEval+ | 17.7% | — |
| MBPP+ | 23.3% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Gemma 1.1 2b IT: —, Llama 3.2 3B: 19.9 (#135)
| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 2b IT | Llama 3.2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 21.9% |
| BALROG | — | 10.1% |
Reasoning Llama 3.2 3B leads
Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 18.2 (#268), Llama 3.2 3B: 20.1 (#225)
| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 2b IT | Llama 3.2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1005 | 1095 |
Math Llama 3.2 3B leads
Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 28.3 (#230), Llama 3.2 3B: 29.9 (#213)
| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 2b IT | Llama 3.2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1047 | 1126 |
Knowledge Llama 3.2 3B leads
Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 26.0 (#255), Llama 3.2 3B: 29.1 (#232)
| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 2b IT | Llama 3.2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 970 | 1090 |
Multilingual Llama 3.2 3B leads
Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 24.7 (#284), Llama 3.2 3B: 26.4 (#276)
| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 2b IT | Llama 3.2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 988 | 1019 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1011 | 1017 |
| LMArena German | 944 | 1056 |
| LMArena Russian | 990 | 949 |
| LMArena Korean | 899 | — |
Instruction Following Llama 3.2 3B leads
Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 50.1 (#294), Llama 3.2 3B: 56.3 (#270)
| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 2b IT | Llama 3.2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 992 | 1089 |
Long Context Llama 3.2 3B leads
Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 30.5 (#281), Llama 3.2 3B: 33.4 (#256)
| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 2b IT | Llama 3.2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1003 | 1101 |
Writing & Preference Too close to call
Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 25.3 (#301), Llama 3.2 3B: 24.9 (#302)
| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 2b IT | Llama 3.2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1022 | 1110 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 998 | 1094 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 958 | 1105 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 595 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemma 1.1 2b IT better than Llama 3.2 3B?
Gemma 1.1 2b IT and Llama 3.2 3B score almost the same on the Noometry Index (28.8 vs 28.4), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Is Gemma 1.1 2b IT or Llama 3.2 3B better for coding?
Gemma 1.1 2b IT scores higher on coding benchmarks: 29.6 versus 27.1 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Gemma 1.1 2b IT and Llama 3.2 3B share?
13 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 1.1 2b IT has 16 scored results on Noometry and Llama 3.2 3B has 18.