Model comparison
Gemma 1.1 2b IT vs phi-3-medium 14B
Gemma 1.1 2b IT and phi-3-medium 14B score almost the same on the Noometry Index (29.3 vs 29.7), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.
Google
MicrosoftSummary
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Gemma 1.1 2b IT leads 26.5 to 9.1.
Side by side
| Gemma 1.1 2b IT | phi-3-medium 14B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Microsoft | |
| Noometry Index | 29.3 | 29.7 |
| Released | — | 2024-04-23 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | — | — |
| Max output | — | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Results tracked | 16 | 13 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding phi-3-medium 14B leads
Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 30.1 (#299), phi-3-medium 14B: 36.8 (#201)
| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 2b IT | phi-3-medium 14B |
|---|---|---|
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 37.6% |
| LMArena Coding | 1034 | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 48.7% |
| HumanEval+ | 17.7% | — |
| MBPP+ | 23.3% | — |
Reasoning Not comparable
Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 19.1 (#270), phi-3-medium 14B: —
| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 2b IT | phi-3-medium 14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1005 | — |
| Adversarial NLI | — | 55.8% |
| BIG-Bench Hard | — | 81.4% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 121.23 |
| HellaSwag | — | 82.4% |
| WinoGrande | — | 81.5% |
Math Gemma 1.1 2b IT leads
Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 30.8 (#232), phi-3-medium 14B: 27.3 (#250)
| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 2b IT | phi-3-medium 14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1047 | — |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 17.6% |
Knowledge Gemma 1.1 2b IT leads
Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 26.5 (#258), phi-3-medium 14B: 9.1 (#306)
| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 2b IT | phi-3-medium 14B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 27.6% |
| LMArena Expert | 970 | — |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | — | 91.6% |
| MMLU | — | 78% |
| OpenBookQA | — | 87.4% |
| TriviaQA | — | 73.9% |
Multilingual Not comparable
Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 24.6 (#289), phi-3-medium 14B: —
| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 2b IT | phi-3-medium 14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 988 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1012 | — |
| LMArena German | 944 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 899 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 990 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 49.9 (#299), phi-3-medium 14B: —
| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 2b IT | phi-3-medium 14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 992 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 30.6 (#286), phi-3-medium 14B: —
| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 2b IT | phi-3-medium 14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1003 | — |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 25.1 (#306), phi-3-medium 14B: —
| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 2b IT | phi-3-medium 14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1022 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 998 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 959 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemma 1.1 2b IT better than phi-3-medium 14B?
Gemma 1.1 2b IT and phi-3-medium 14B score almost the same on the Noometry Index (29.3 vs 29.7), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Is Gemma 1.1 2b IT or phi-3-medium 14B better for coding?
phi-3-medium 14B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 36.8 versus 30.1 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Gemma 1.1 2b IT and phi-3-medium 14B share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 1.1 2b IT has 16 scored results on Noometry and phi-3-medium 14B has 13.