+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
Gemini 1.5 Flash vs Llama 3.2 90B Instruct
Comprehensive side-by-side LLM comparison
Gemini 1.5 Flash leads with 2.2% higher average benchmark score. Gemini 1.5 Flash offers 800.8K more tokens in context window than Llama 3.2 90B Instruct. Both models have similar pricing. Llama 3.2 90B Instruct is available on 5 providers. Both models have their strengths depending on your specific coding needs.
+
+
+
+
Gemini 1.5 Flash was created as a fast and efficient multimodal model, designed to provide quick responses while handling text, images, and other modalities. Built for applications requiring low latency and high throughput, it balances capability with speed to serve real-time and high-volume use cases.
+
+
+
+
Meta
Llama 3.2 90B was developed as a flagship-tier open-source model, designed to provide advanced capabilities with 90 billion parameters. Built to serve applications requiring high-quality reasoning and generation, it represents a powerful option within the Llama 3.2 series for demanding tasks.
4 months newer
Gemini 1.5 Flash
2024-05-01
Llama 3.2 90B Instruct
Meta
2024-09-25
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
Pricing Comparison
Cost per million tokens (USD)
+
+
+
+
Gemini 1.5 Flash
Input:$0.15
Output:$0.60
+
+
+
+
Llama 3.2 90B Instruct
Input:$0.35
Output:$0.40
Performance Metrics
Context window and performance specifications
Average performance across 6 common benchmarks
+
+
+
+
Gemini 1.5 Flash
Average Score:69.8%(+2.2%)
+
+
+
+
Llama 3.2 90B Instruct
Average Score:67.5%
+
+
+
+
Knowledge Cutoff
Training data recency comparison
Gemini 1.5 Flash
2023-11-01
More recent knowledge cutoff means awareness of newer technologies and frameworks
Provider Availability & Performance
Available providers and their performance metrics
+
+
+
+
Gemini 1.5 Flash
1 providers
Throughput: 150 tok/s
Latency: 0.3ms
+
+
+
+
Llama 3.2 90B Instruct
+
+
+
+
Gemini 1.5 Flash
Avg Score:69.8%(+2.2%)
Providers:1
+
+
+
+
Llama 3.2 90B Instruct
Avg Score:67.5%
Providers:5