# Gemma 2 9B vs Llama 3.2 1B

> Gemma 2 9B is the stronger model overall, scoring 25.7 to 19.9 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/gemma-2-9b-vs-llama-3-2-1b
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 19

## Summary

- They share 19 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 2 9B scores higher in 6 categories and Llama 3.2 1B in 2 categories; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in multilingual, where Gemma 2 9B leads 36.8 to 23.9.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is BigCodeBench Complete: 40.6% for Gemma 2 9B and 11.3% for Llama 3.2 1B.

## Snapshot

| | Gemma 2 9B | Llama 3.2 1B |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Google | Meta |
| Noometry Index | 25.7 | 19.9 |
| Rank | 334 | 349 |
| Context | — | 60K |
| Input $/M | — | $0.027 |
| Output $/M | — | $0.20 |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- Gemma 2 9B: 29.0 (#299)
- Llama 3.2 1B: 20.6 (#333)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2 9B | Llama 3.2 1B |
|---|---|---|
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 34.7% | 8.2% |
| LMArena Coding | 1174 | 1071 |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 40.6% | 11.3% |
| LiveBench Coding | 22.5% | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Gemma 2 9B: —
- Llama 3.2 1B: 14.5 (#142)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2 9B | Llama 3.2 1B |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 10.8% |
| BALROG | — | 6.6% |

## Reasoning

- Gemma 2 9B: 15.3 (#306)
- Llama 3.2 1B: 15.6 (#304)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2 9B | Llama 3.2 1B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1172 | 1044 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 119.78 | 101.95 |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 0% |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 15.2% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 36.4% | — |
| LiveBench | 28.7% | — |
| PIQA | 83.7% | — |

## Math

- Gemma 2 9B: 9.3 (#312)
- Llama 3.2 1B: 9.7 (#308)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2 9B | Llama 3.2 1B |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 0.6% | 0.6% |
| LMArena Math | 1183 | 1086 |
| LiveBench Math | 19.8% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 21% | — |
| GSM8K | 84.9% | — |

## Knowledge

- Gemma 2 9B: 9.7 (#300)
- Llama 3.2 1B: 7.2 (#307)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2 9B | Llama 3.2 1B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 27.5% | 23.9% |
| LMArena Expert | 1147 | 1007 |
| BoolQ | 85.7% | — |
| MMLU | 72.1% | — |

## Multilingual

- Gemma 2 9B: 36.8 (#233)
- Llama 3.2 1B: 23.9 (#287)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2 9B | Llama 3.2 1B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1188 | 973 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1185 | 958 |
| LMArena German | 1186 | 1014 |
| LMArena Russian | 1200 | 941 |
| LMArena French | 1189 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1144 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1137 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1200 | — |

## Instruction Following

- Gemma 2 9B: 57.8 (#264)
- Llama 3.2 1B: 52.6 (#285)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2 9B | Llama 3.2 1B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1178 | 1031 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 52.6% | — |

## Long Context

- Gemma 2 9B: 36.3 (#228)
- Llama 3.2 1B: 31.9 (#269)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2 9B | Llama 3.2 1B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1197 | 1050 |

## Writing & Preference

- Gemma 2 9B: 32.3 (#276)
- Llama 3.2 1B: 21.4 (#305)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2 9B | Llama 3.2 1B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1207 | 1055 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1206 | 1033 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 841 | 200 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1193 | 1030 |
| LiveBench Language | 25.5% | — |

## FAQ

### Is Gemma 2 9B better than Llama 3.2 1B?

Gemma 2 9B is the stronger model overall, scoring 25.7 to 19.9 on the Noometry Index.

### Is Gemma 2 9B or Llama 3.2 1B better for coding?

Gemma 2 9B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 29.0 versus 20.6 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do Gemma 2 9B and Llama 3.2 1B share?

19 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 2 9B has 35 scored results on Noometry and Llama 3.2 1B has 22.