Model comparison
Gemma 2 9B vs Llama 3.1 Tulu 3 8b
Llama 3.1 Tulu 3 8b is the stronger model overall, scoring 35.7 to 25.9 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 11 shared benchmarks.
Google
Allen Institute for AI (Ai2)Summary
- They share 11 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 2 9B scores higher in 2 categories and Llama 3.1 Tulu 3 8b in 5 categories; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Llama 3.1 Tulu 3 8b leads 33.9 to 9.9.
Side by side
| Gemma 2 9B | Llama 3.1 Tulu 3 8b | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Allen Institute for AI (Ai2) | |
| Noometry Index | 25.9 | 35.7 |
| Released | 2024-06-24 | — |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | — | — |
| Max output | — | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Results tracked | 35 | 11 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Llama 3.1 Tulu 3 8b leads
Gemma 2 9B: 29.4 (#304), Llama 3.1 Tulu 3 8b: 34.4 (#235)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 9B | Llama 3.1 Tulu 3 8b |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1173 | 1183 |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 34.7% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 22.5% | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 40.6% | — |
Reasoning Llama 3.1 Tulu 3 8b leads
Gemma 2 9B: 15.9 (#309), Llama 3.1 Tulu 3 8b: 22.8 (#188)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 9B | Llama 3.1 Tulu 3 8b |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1171 | 1174 |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 15.2% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 36.4% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 119.83 | — |
| LiveBench | 28.7% | — |
| PIQA | 83.7% | — |
Math Llama 3.1 Tulu 3 8b leads
Gemma 2 9B: 9.9 (#318), Llama 3.1 Tulu 3 8b: 33.9 (#198)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 9B | Llama 3.1 Tulu 3 8b |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1183 | 1195 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 0.6% | — |
| LiveBench Math | 19.8% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 21% | — |
| GSM8K | 84.9% | — |
Knowledge Not comparable
Gemma 2 9B: 9.7 (#305), Llama 3.1 Tulu 3 8b: —
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 9B | Llama 3.1 Tulu 3 8b |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 27.5% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1147 | — |
| BoolQ | 85.7% | — |
| MMLU | 72.1% | — |
Multilingual Gemma 2 9B leads
Gemma 2 9B: 36.6 (#238), Llama 3.1 Tulu 3 8b: 35.4 (#246)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 9B | Llama 3.1 Tulu 3 8b |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1188 | 1169 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1185 | 1176 |
| LMArena Russian | 1200 | 1193 |
| LMArena French | 1190 | — |
| LMArena German | 1186 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1144 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1137 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1200 | — |
Instruction Following Llama 3.1 Tulu 3 8b leads
Gemma 2 9B: 57.6 (#269), Llama 3.1 Tulu 3 8b: 61.3 (#246)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 9B | Llama 3.1 Tulu 3 8b |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1178 | 1174 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 52.6% | — |
Long Context Too close to call
Gemma 2 9B: 36.3 (#233), Llama 3.1 Tulu 3 8b: 35.8 (#239)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 9B | Llama 3.1 Tulu 3 8b |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1197 | 1181 |
Writing & Preference Llama 3.1 Tulu 3 8b leads
Gemma 2 9B: 32.1 (#281), Llama 3.1 Tulu 3 8b: 39.7 (#245)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 9B | Llama 3.1 Tulu 3 8b |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1207 | 1193 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1206 | 1182 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1193 | 1154 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 841 | — |
| LiveBench Language | 25.5% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemma 2 9B better than Llama 3.1 Tulu 3 8b?
Llama 3.1 Tulu 3 8b is the stronger model overall, scoring 35.7 to 25.9 on the Noometry Index.
Is Gemma 2 9B or Llama 3.1 Tulu 3 8b better for coding?
Llama 3.1 Tulu 3 8b scores higher on coding benchmarks: 34.4 versus 29.4 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Gemma 2 9B and Llama 3.1 Tulu 3 8b share?
11 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 2 9B has 35 scored results on Noometry and Llama 3.1 Tulu 3 8b has 11.