Model comparison

Gemma 2 9B vs Llama 3.1-70B

Llama 3.1-70B is the stronger model overall, scoring 29.6 to 25.9 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 25 shared benchmarks.

Gemma 2 9B Google

25.9

Rank #341 Confirmed

Llama 3.1-70B Meta

29.6

Rank #308 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 25 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 2 9B scores higher in 0 categories and Llama 3.1-70B in 8 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where Llama 3.1-70B leads 24.2 to 9.7.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is GPQA Diamond: 27.5% for Gemma 2 9B and 44.2% for Llama 3.1-70B.

Side by side

Gemma 2 9B and Llama 3.1-70B specifications
Gemma 2 9BLlama 3.1-70B
ProviderGoogleMeta
Noometry Index25.929.6
Released2024-06-242024-07-23
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window—128K
Max output—4K
Input $ / M tokens—$0.40
Output $ / M tokens—$0.40
Results tracked3535

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding Too close to call

Gemma 2 9B: 29.4 (#304), Llama 3.1-70B: 30.3 (#296)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 2 9BLlama 3.1-70B
BigCodeBench Instruct34.7%46.1%
LMArena Coding11731260
BigCodeBench Complete40.6%54.8%
WeirdML—9%
LiveBench Coding22.5%—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Gemma 2 9B: —, Llama 3.1-70B: 25.1 (#112)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 2 9BLlama 3.1-70B
TheAgentCompany—6.9%
BALROG—27.9%

Reasoning Llama 3.1-70B leads

Gemma 2 9B: 15.9 (#309), Llama 3.1-70B: 21.6 (#220)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 2 9BLlama 3.1-70B
LMArena Hard Prompts11711241
Epoch Capabilities Index119.83125.92
LiveBench Reasoning15.2%—
DTBench—60%
LiveBench Data Analysis36.4%—
LMCA—14.8%
LiveBench28.7%—
PIQA83.7%—

Math Llama 3.1-70B leads

Gemma 2 9B: 9.9 (#318), Llama 3.1-70B: 13.5 (#304)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 2 9BLlama 3.1-70B
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-20250.6%3.6%
LMArena Math11831252
MATH Level 521%36.7%
Omni-MATH—21%
LiveBench Math19.8%—
GSM8K84.9%—

Knowledge Llama 3.1-70B leads

Gemma 2 9B: 9.7 (#305), Llama 3.1-70B: 24.2 (#269)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 2 9BLlama 3.1-70B
GPQA Diamond27.5%44.2%
LMArena Expert11471209
MMLU72.1%80.1%
MMLU-Pro—65.3%
GPQA (HELM)—42.6%
BoolQ85.7%—

Multilingual Llama 3.1-70B leads

Gemma 2 9B: 36.6 (#238), Llama 3.1-70B: 38.8 (#225)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 2 9BLlama 3.1-70B
LMArena Non-English11881219
LMArena Chinese11851215
LMArena French11901261
LMArena German11861222
LMArena Japanese11441132
LMArena Korean11371140
LMArena Russian12001234
LMArena Spanish12001253

Instruction Following Llama 3.1-70B leads

Gemma 2 9B: 57.6 (#269), Llama 3.1-70B: 65.3 (#223)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 2 9BLlama 3.1-70B
LMArena Instruction Following11781231
LiveBench Instruction Following52.6%—
IFEval—82.1%

Long Context Llama 3.1-70B leads

Gemma 2 9B: 36.3 (#233), Llama 3.1-70B: 37.6 (#214)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 2 9BLlama 3.1-70B
LMArena Longer Query11971241

Writing & Preference Llama 3.1-70B leads

Gemma 2 9B: 32.1 (#281), Llama 3.1-70B: 35.4 (#267)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 2 9BLlama 3.1-70B
LMArena Text12071261
LMArena Creative Writing12061232
EQ-Bench Creative Writing841784
LMArena Multi-Turn11931256
WildBench—75.8%
LiveBench Language25.5%—

Frequently asked questions

Is Gemma 2 9B better than Llama 3.1-70B?

Llama 3.1-70B is the stronger model overall, scoring 29.6 to 25.9 on the Noometry Index.

Is Gemma 2 9B or Llama 3.1-70B better for coding?

They score almost the same on coding (29.4 vs 30.3); test both on your own repository before choosing.

How many benchmarks do Gemma 2 9B and Llama 3.1-70B share?

25 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 2 9B has 35 scored results on Noometry and Llama 3.1-70B has 35.

Related comparisons

Go deeper