+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
Gemini 1.0 Pro vs Llama 3.2 3B Instruct
Comprehensive side-by-side LLM comparison
Llama 3.2 3B Instruct leads with 4.0% higher average benchmark score. Llama 3.2 3B Instruct offers 215.0K more tokens in context window than Gemini 1.0 Pro. Llama 3.2 3B Instruct is $1.97 cheaper per million tokens. Both models have their strengths depending on your specific coding needs.
+
+
+
+
Gemini 1.0 Pro was developed as Google's initial production-ready multimodal model, designed to handle text and provide strong performance across diverse tasks. Built to serve as a versatile foundation for applications requiring reliable language understanding and generation, it introduced the Gemini architecture to developers and enterprises.
+
+
+
+
Meta
Llama 3.2 3B was created as an ultra-compact open-source model, designed to enable on-device and edge deployment scenarios. Built with just 3 billion parameters while retaining instruction-following abilities, it brings Meta's language technology to mobile devices, IoT applications, and resource-constrained environments.
7 months newer
Gemini 1.0 Pro
2024-02-15
Llama 3.2 3B Instruct
Meta
2024-09-25
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
Pricing Comparison
Cost per million tokens (USD)
+
+
+
+
Gemini 1.0 Pro
Input:$0.50
Output:$1.50
+
+
+
+
Llama 3.2 3B Instruct
Input:$0.01
Output:$0.02($1.97 cheaper)
Performance Metrics
Context window and performance specifications
Average performance across 3 common benchmarks
+
+
+
+
Gemini 1.0 Pro
Average Score:44.1%
+
+
+
+
Llama 3.2 3B Instruct
Average Score:48.1%(+4.0%)
+
+
+
+
Knowledge Cutoff
Training data recency comparison
Gemini 1.0 Pro
2024-02-01
More recent knowledge cutoff means awareness of newer technologies and frameworks
Provider Availability & Performance
Available providers and their performance metrics
+
+
+
+
Gemini 1.0 Pro
1 providers
Throughput: 120 tok/s
Latency: 0.4ms
+
+
+
+
Llama 3.2 3B Instruct
+
+
+
+
Gemini 1.0 Pro
Avg Score:44.1%
Providers:1
+
+
+
+
Llama 3.2 3B Instruct
Avg Score:48.1%(+4.0%)
Providers:1