# Gemini 2.0 Pro vs Llama 2-70B

> Gemini 2.0 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.1 to 24.4 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/gemini-2-0-pro-vs-llama-2-70b
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 3

## Summary

- They share 3 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 2.0 Pro scores higher in 6 categories and Llama 2-70B in 1 category; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Gemini 2.0 Pro leads 39.7 to 8.1.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is MATH Level 5: 83.5% for Gemini 2.0 Pro and 3.3% for Llama 2-70B.
- Llama 2-70B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Llama 2-70B |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Google | Meta |
| Noometry Index | 39.1 | 24.4 |
| Rank | 173 | 349 |
| Context | — | — |
| Input $/M | — | — |
| Output $/M | — | — |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |

## Coding

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: 37.8 (#187)
- Llama 2-70B: 31.4 (#286)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Llama 2-70B |
|---|---|---|
| Aider Polyglot | 35.6% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 63.5% | — |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1079 |

## Reasoning

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: 22.3 (#198)
- Llama 2-70B: 14.4 (#325)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Llama 2-70B |
|---|---|---|
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 135.06 | 113.79 |
| EnigmaEval | 0.7% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 60.1% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1073 |
| DTBench | — | 41.6% |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 68% | — |
| BIG-Bench Hard | — | 64.9% |
| CommonsenseQA 2.0 | — | 50% |
| ForecastBench | — | 51.4 |
| HellaSwag | — | 85.3% |
| LAMBADA | — | 78.9% |
| LiveBench | 65.1% | — |
| PIQA | — | 82.8% |
| WinoGrande | — | 80.2% |

## Math

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: 39.7 (#100)
- Llama 2-70B: 8.1 (#326)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Llama 2-70B |
|---|---|---|
| MATH Level 5 | 83.5% | 3.3% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 0% |
| LiveBench Math | 71% | — |
| LMArena Math | — | 1091 |
| GSM8K | — | 69.6% |

## Knowledge

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: 36.5 (#167)
- Llama 2-70B: 7.4 (#310)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Llama 2-70B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 65.7% | 26.3% |
| Confabulations | 18.4% | — |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1039 |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | — | 78.3% |
| BoolQ | — | 88.6% |
| MMLU | — | 69.9% |
| OpenBookQA | — | 60.2% |
| TriviaQA | — | 87.6% |

## Multilingual

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: —
- Llama 2-70B: 27.7 (#274)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Llama 2-70B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1045 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 995 |
| LMArena French | — | 1090 |
| LMArena German | — | 1041 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 927 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 964 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1083 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1143 |

## Instruction Following

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: 75.5 (#59)
- Llama 2-70B: 54.9 (#278)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Llama 2-70B |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 83.4% | — |
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1071 |

## Long Context

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: 29.2 (#292)
- Llama 2-70B: 32.3 (#270)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Llama 2-70B |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | 41.7% | — |
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1062 |

## Writing & Preference

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: 52.7 (#165)
- Llama 2-70B: 32.3 (#279)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Llama 2-70B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1115 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1075 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1088 |
| LiveBench Language | 44.9% | — |

## FAQ

### Is Gemini 2.0 Pro better than Llama 2-70B?

Gemini 2.0 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.1 to 24.4 on the Noometry Index.

### Is Gemini 2.0 Pro or Llama 2-70B better for coding?

Gemini 2.0 Pro scores higher on coding benchmarks: 37.8 versus 31.4 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do Gemini 2.0 Pro and Llama 2-70B share?

3 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 2.0 Pro has 14 scored results on Noometry and Llama 2-70B has 35.