Model comparison
Gemma 2B vs Llama 3.1 Nemotron 51b Instruct
Llama 3.1 Nemotron 51b Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 35.9 to 29.6 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 11 shared benchmarks.
Google
NVIDIASummary
- They share 11 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 2B scores higher in 0 categories and Llama 3.1 Nemotron 51b Instruct in 7 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Llama 3.1 Nemotron 51b Instruct leads 43.4 to 24.0.
Side by side
| Gemma 2B | Llama 3.1 Nemotron 51b Instruct | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | NVIDIA | |
| Noometry Index | 29.6 | 35.9 |
| Released | 2024-02-21 | — |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | — | — |
| Max output | — | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Results tracked | 23 | 12 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Llama 3.1 Nemotron 51b Instruct leads
Gemma 2B: 29.4 (#305), Llama 3.1 Nemotron 51b Instruct: 35.6 (#222)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | Llama 3.1 Nemotron 51b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1010 | 1223 |
| HumanEval+ | 20.7% | — |
| MBPP+ | 34.1% | — |
Reasoning Llama 3.1 Nemotron 51b Instruct leads
Gemma 2B: 18.8 (#275), Llama 3.1 Nemotron 51b Instruct: 23.5 (#177)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | Llama 3.1 Nemotron 51b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 989 | 1203 |
| BIG-Bench Hard | 35.2% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 94.2 | — |
| HellaSwag | 71.4% | — |
| PIQA | 77.3% | — |
| WinoGrande | 65.4% | — |
Math Llama 3.1 Nemotron 51b Instruct leads
Gemma 2B: 30.0 (#239), Llama 3.1 Nemotron 51b Instruct: 34.6 (#193)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | Llama 3.1 Nemotron 51b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1009 | 1230 |
| GSM8K | 17.7% | — |
Knowledge Not comparable
Gemma 2B: —, Llama 3.1 Nemotron 51b Instruct: 31.9 (#218)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | Llama 3.1 Nemotron 51b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | — | 1167 |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | 42.1% | — |
| BoolQ | 69.4% | — |
| MMLU | 42.3% | — |
| TriviaQA | 53.2% | — |
Multilingual Llama 3.1 Nemotron 51b Instruct leads
Gemma 2B: 23.0 (#294), Llama 3.1 Nemotron 51b Instruct: 36.1 (#241)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | Llama 3.1 Nemotron 51b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 958 | 1181 |
| LMArena Chinese | 986 | 1180 |
| LMArena Russian | 937 | 1187 |
Instruction Following Llama 3.1 Nemotron 51b Instruct leads
Gemma 2B: 48.5 (#302), Llama 3.1 Nemotron 51b Instruct: 62.9 (#233)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | Llama 3.1 Nemotron 51b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 970 | 1201 |
Long Context Llama 3.1 Nemotron 51b Instruct leads
Gemma 2B: 29.9 (#291), Llama 3.1 Nemotron 51b Instruct: 36.5 (#230)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | Llama 3.1 Nemotron 51b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 981 | 1205 |
Writing & Preference Llama 3.1 Nemotron 51b Instruct leads
Gemma 2B: 24.0 (#308), Llama 3.1 Nemotron 51b Instruct: 43.4 (#229)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | Llama 3.1 Nemotron 51b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1002 | 1228 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 987 | 1213 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 945 | 1227 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemma 2B better than Llama 3.1 Nemotron 51b Instruct?
Llama 3.1 Nemotron 51b Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 35.9 to 29.6 on the Noometry Index.
Is Gemma 2B or Llama 3.1 Nemotron 51b Instruct better for coding?
Llama 3.1 Nemotron 51b Instruct scores higher on coding benchmarks: 35.6 versus 29.4 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Gemma 2B and Llama 3.1 Nemotron 51b Instruct share?
11 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 2B has 23 scored results on Noometry and Llama 3.1 Nemotron 51b Instruct has 12.