# Gemini 2.0 Pro vs Llama 3.2 3B

> Gemini 2.0 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.6 to 28.4 on the Noometry Index.

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

## Summary

- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Gemini 2.0 Pro leads 52.7 to 24.9.
- Llama 3.2 3B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Llama 3.2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Google | Meta |
| Noometry Index | 38.6 | 28.4 |
| Rank | 171 | 318 |
| Context | — | 131K |
| Input $/M | — | $0.05 |
| Output $/M | — | $0.33 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |

## Coding

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: 37.4 (#182)
- Llama 3.2 3B: 27.1 (#314)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Llama 3.2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| Aider Polyglot | 35.6% | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 23.4% |
| LiveBench Coding | 63.5% | — |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1098 |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 28.3% |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: —
- Llama 3.2 3B: 19.9 (#135)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Llama 3.2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 21.9% |
| BALROG | — | 10.1% |

## Reasoning

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: 21.6 (#194)
- Llama 3.2 3B: 20.1 (#225)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Llama 3.2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| EnigmaEval | 0.7% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 60.1% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1095 |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 68% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 135.06 | — |
| LiveBench | 65.1% | — |

## Math

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: 37.1 (#101)
- Llama 3.2 3B: 29.9 (#213)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Llama 3.2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Math | 71% | — |
| LMArena Math | — | 1126 |
| MATH Level 5 | 83.5% | — |

## Knowledge

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: 36.5 (#156)
- Llama 3.2 3B: 29.1 (#232)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Llama 3.2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 65.7% | — |
| Confabulations | 18.4% | — |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1090 |

## Multilingual

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: —
- Llama 3.2 3B: 26.4 (#276)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Llama 3.2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1019 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1017 |
| LMArena German | — | 1056 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 949 |

## Instruction Following

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: 75.6 (#57)
- Llama 3.2 3B: 56.3 (#270)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Llama 3.2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 83.4% | — |
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1089 |

## Long Context

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: 29.1 (#287)
- Llama 3.2 3B: 33.4 (#256)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Llama 3.2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | 41.7% | — |
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1101 |

## Writing & Preference

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: 52.7 (#164)
- Llama 3.2 3B: 24.9 (#302)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Llama 3.2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1110 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1094 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 595 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1105 |
| LiveBench Language | 44.9% | — |

## FAQ

### Is Gemini 2.0 Pro better than Llama 3.2 3B?

Gemini 2.0 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.6 to 28.4 on the Noometry Index.

### Is Gemini 2.0 Pro or Llama 3.2 3B better for coding?

Gemini 2.0 Pro scores higher on coding benchmarks: 37.4 versus 27.1 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do Gemini 2.0 Pro and Llama 3.2 3B share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 2.0 Pro has 14 scored results on Noometry and Llama 3.2 3B has 18.