# Gemma 1.1 2b IT vs Llama 13b

> Gemma 1.1 2b IT is the stronger model overall, scoring 28.8 to 23.9 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/gemma-1-1-2b-it-vs-llama-13b
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 8

## Summary

- They share 8 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 1.1 2b IT scores higher in 6 categories and Llama 13b in 0 categories; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in instruction following, where Gemma 1.1 2b IT leads 50.1 to 36.9.

## Snapshot

| | Gemma 1.1 2b IT | Llama 13b |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Google | Meta |
| Noometry Index | 28.8 | 23.9 |
| Rank | 313 | 344 |
| Context | — | — |
| Input $/M | — | — |
| Output $/M | — | — |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 29.6 (#294)
- Llama 13b: 20.9 (#332)

| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 2b IT | Llama 13b |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1034 | 683 |
| HumanEval+ | 17.7% | — |
| MBPP+ | 23.3% | — |

## Reasoning

- Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 18.2 (#268)
- Llama 13b: 13.4 (#327)

| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 2b IT | Llama 13b |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1005 | 728 |
| BIG-Bench Hard | — | 37.9% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 100.09 |
| HellaSwag | — | 79.2% |
| LAMBADA | — | 75.2% |
| PIQA | — | 80.1% |
| WinoGrande | — | 73% |

## Math

- Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 28.3 (#230)
- Llama 13b: 24.4 (#259)

| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 2b IT | Llama 13b |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1047 | 838 |
| GSM8K | — | 20.6% |

## Knowledge

- Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 26.0 (#255)
- Llama 13b: —

| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 2b IT | Llama 13b |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 970 | — |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | — | 52.7% |
| BoolQ | — | 78.7% |
| MMLU | — | 47.7% |
| OpenBookQA | — | 56.4% |
| TriviaQA | — | 77.9% |

## Multimodal

- Gemma 1.1 2b IT: —
- Llama 13b: —

| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 2b IT | Llama 13b |
|---|---|---|
| ScienceQA | — | 43.3% |

## Multilingual

- Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 24.7 (#284)
- Llama 13b: 16.8 (#292)

| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 2b IT | Llama 13b |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 988 | 819 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1011 | — |
| LMArena German | 944 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 899 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 990 | — |

## Instruction Following

- Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 50.1 (#294)
- Llama 13b: 36.9 (#300)

| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 2b IT | Llama 13b |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 992 | 781 |

## Long Context

- Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 30.5 (#281)
- Llama 13b: —

| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 2b IT | Llama 13b |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1003 | — |

## Writing & Preference

- Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 25.3 (#301)
- Llama 13b: 13.9 (#307)

| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 2b IT | Llama 13b |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1022 | 834 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 998 | 794 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 958 | 753 |

## FAQ

### Is Gemma 1.1 2b IT better than Llama 13b?

Gemma 1.1 2b IT is the stronger model overall, scoring 28.8 to 23.9 on the Noometry Index.

### Is Gemma 1.1 2b IT or Llama 13b better for coding?

Gemma 1.1 2b IT scores higher on coding benchmarks: 29.6 versus 20.9 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do Gemma 1.1 2b IT and Llama 13b share?

8 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 1.1 2b IT has 16 scored results on Noometry and Llama 13b has 21.