# Gemini 2.0 Pro vs Llama 3.2 90B

> Gemini 2.0 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.6 to 27.1 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/gemini-2-0-pro-vs-llama-3-2-90b
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 4

## Summary

- They share 4 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 2.0 Pro scores higher in 3 categories and Llama 3.2 90B in 0 categories; 2 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Gemini 2.0 Pro leads 37.1 to 10.4.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is MATH Level 5: 83.5% for Gemini 2.0 Pro and 39.4% for Llama 3.2 90B.
- Llama 3.2 90B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Llama 3.2 90B |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Google | Meta |
| Noometry Index | 38.6 | 27.1 |
| Rank | 171 | 326 |
| Context | — | — |
| Input $/M | — | — |
| Output $/M | — | — |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |

## Coding

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: 37.4 (#182)
- Llama 3.2 90B: —

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Llama 3.2 90B |
|---|---|---|
| Aider Polyglot | 35.6% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 63.5% | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: —
- Llama 3.2 90B: 29.7 (#73)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Llama 3.2 90B |
|---|---|---|
| BALROG | — | 27.3% |

## Reasoning

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: 21.6 (#194)
- Llama 3.2 90B: 20.9 (#207)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Llama 3.2 90B |
|---|---|---|
| EnigmaEval | 0.7% | 0.4% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 135.06 | 125.5 |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 60.1% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 68% | — |
| LiveBench | 65.1% | — |

## Math

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: 37.1 (#101)
- Llama 3.2 90B: 10.4 (#302)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Llama 3.2 90B |
|---|---|---|
| MATH Level 5 | 83.5% | 39.4% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 2.6% |
| LiveBench Math | 71% | — |

## Knowledge

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: 36.5 (#156)
- Llama 3.2 90B: 21.7 (#269)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Llama 3.2 90B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 65.7% | 41% |
| Confabulations | 18.4% | — |
| MMLU | — | 80.3% |

## Multimodal

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: —
- Llama 3.2 90B: 24.9 (#119)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Llama 3.2 90B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1000 |
| GeoBench | — | 52% |

## Instruction Following

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: 75.6 (#57)
- Llama 3.2 90B: —

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Llama 3.2 90B |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 83.4% | — |

## Long Context

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: 29.1 (#287)
- Llama 3.2 90B: —

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Llama 3.2 90B |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | 41.7% | — |

## Writing & Preference

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: 52.7 (#164)
- Llama 3.2 90B: —

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Llama 3.2 90B |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Language | 44.9% | — |

## FAQ

### Is Gemini 2.0 Pro better than Llama 3.2 90B?

Gemini 2.0 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.6 to 27.1 on the Noometry Index.

### How many benchmarks do Gemini 2.0 Pro and Llama 3.2 90B share?

4 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 2.0 Pro has 14 scored results on Noometry and Llama 3.2 90B has 9.