# Gemini 2.5 Pro vs Llama 2-13B

> Gemini 2.5 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 44.9 to 29.1 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/gemini-2-5-pro-vs-llama-2-13b
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 20

## Summary

- They share 20 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 2.5 Pro scores higher in 8 categories and Llama 2-13B in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Gemini 2.5 Pro leads 63.9 to 30.0.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is DTBench: 82.4% for Gemini 2.5 Pro and 42.2% for Llama 2-13B.
- Llama 2-13B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Llama 2-13B |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Google | Meta |
| Noometry Index | 44.9 | 29.1 |
| Rank | 67 | 304 |
| Context | 1.05M | — |
| Input $/M | $1.25 | — |
| Output $/M | $10 | — |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |

## Coding

- Gemini 2.5 Pro: 42.8 (#86)
- Llama 2-13B: 30.4 (#287)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Llama 2-13B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1452 | 1062 |
| SWE-bench Verified | 57.6% | — |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 53.6% | — |
| Aider Polyglot | 83.1% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1227 | — |
| SciCode | 42.8% | — |
| GSO | 3.9% | — |
| WeirdML | 54% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 85.9% | — |
| CadEval | 64% | — |
| ALE-Bench | 785.52 | — |
| AlgoTune | 1.51 | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Gemini 2.5 Pro: 29.1 (#81)
- Llama 2-13B: —

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Llama 2-13B |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | 32.6% | — |
| GDPval | 23.3% | — |
| Remote Labor Index | 0.8% | — |
| TheAgentCompany | 30.3% | — |
| τ²-bench Banking | 13.7% | — |
| DeepResearch Bench | 42.8% | — |
| BALROG | 43.3% | — |
| LMArena Search | 1142 | — |
| METR Time Horizons | 55.4% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 573.64 | — |

## Reasoning

- Gemini 2.5 Pro: 28.8 (#85)
- Llama 2-13B: 12.3 (#333)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Llama 2-13B |
|---|---|---|
| Chess Puzzles | 20% | 0% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1455 | 1051 |
| DTBench | 82.4% | 42.2% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 145.32 | 105.8 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 4.9% | — |
| SimpleBench | 62.4% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 70.3% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 41% | — |
| CritPt | 2% | — |
| EnigmaEval | 5.6% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 89.8% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 79.9% | — |
| LMCA | 34.8% | — |
| BIG-Bench Hard | — | 58.2% |
| ForecastBench | 61.3 | — |
| HellaSwag | — | 80.7% |
| LAMBADA | — | 76.5% |
| LiveBench | 82.3% | — |
| PIQA | — | 80.8% |
| WinoGrande | — | 72.8% |

## Math

- Gemini 2.5 Pro: 31.9 (#191)
- Llama 2-13B: 28.7 (#226)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Llama 2-13B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1450 | 1065 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 24.6% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 0% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 84.7% | — |
| Omni-MATH | 41.6% | — |
| LiveBench Math | 90.2% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 95.9% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 14.1% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 4.2% | — |
| GSM8K | — | 36.9% |

## Knowledge

- Gemini 2.5 Pro: 55.8 (#41)
- Llama 2-13B: 27.5 (#244)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Llama 2-13B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1452 | 1030 |
| GPQA Diamond | 85.3% | — |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 21.6% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | 86.3% | — |
| Confabulations | 10.6% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 7% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 74.9% | — |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | — | 60.3% |
| BoolQ | — | 82.4% |
| MMLU | — | 55.6% |
| OpenBookQA | — | 57% |
| TriviaQA | — | 79.6% |

## Multimodal

- Gemini 2.5 Pro: 44.5 (#16)
- Llama 2-13B: —

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Llama 2-13B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1263 | — |
| GeoBench | 86% | — |
| VPCT | 48% | — |
| LMArena Document | 1421 | — |
| ScienceQA | — | 55.8% |
| SpatialViz-Bench | 44.7% | — |

## Multilingual

- Gemini 2.5 Pro: 55.5 (#30)
- Llama 2-13B: 26.7 (#274)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Llama 2-13B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1452 | 1024 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1507 | 1001 |
| LMArena French | 1473 | 1043 |
| LMArena German | 1487 | 1009 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1462 | 894 |
| LMArena Korean | 1435 | 953 |
| LMArena Russian | 1460 | 1055 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1473 | 1086 |

## Instruction Following

- Gemini 2.5 Pro: 75.2 (#71)
- Llama 2-13B: 53.5 (#282)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Llama 2-13B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1436 | 1046 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 80.6% | — |
| IFEval | 84% | — |

## Long Context

- Gemini 2.5 Pro: 59.7 (#5)
- Llama 2-13B: 32.3 (#264)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Llama 2-13B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1449 | 1064 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | 91.7% | — |

## Writing & Preference

- Gemini 2.5 Pro: 63.9 (#60)
- Llama 2-13B: 30.0 (#284)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Llama 2-13B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1458 | 1085 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1453 | 1047 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1453 | 1050 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 83.8% | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1421 | — |
| WildBench | 85.7% | — |
| LiveBench Language | 67.8% | — |

## FAQ

### Is Gemini 2.5 Pro better than Llama 2-13B?

Gemini 2.5 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 44.9 to 29.1 on the Noometry Index.

### Is Gemini 2.5 Pro or Llama 2-13B better for coding?

Gemini 2.5 Pro scores higher on coding benchmarks: 42.8 versus 30.4 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do Gemini 2.5 Pro and Llama 2-13B share?

20 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 2.5 Pro has 78 scored results on Noometry and Llama 2-13B has 32.