+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
Gemma 2 27B vs Llama 3.2 11B Instruct
Comprehensive side-by-side LLM comparison
Llama 3.2 11B Instruct leads with 3.7% higher average benchmark score. Llama 3.2 11B Instruct supports multimodal inputs. Llama 3.2 11B Instruct is available on 6 providers. Both models have their strengths depending on your specific coding needs.
+
+
+
+
Gemma 2 27B was developed as an open-source language model with 27 billion parameters, designed to provide researchers and developers with a capable, instruction-tuned model for experimentation and deployment. Built to democratize access to advanced language understanding, it combines strong performance with the flexibility of open-source licensing.
+
+
+
+
Meta
Llama 3.2 11B was introduced as a mid-sized variant in the Llama 3.2 family, designed to offer enhanced capabilities while maintaining efficiency. Built to provide a balanced option for applications requiring more than lightweight models but less than flagship sizes, it serves diverse use cases in the open-source community.
3 months newer
Gemma 2 27B
2024-06-27
Llama 3.2 11B Instruct
Meta
2024-09-25
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
Performance Metrics
Context window and performance specifications
Average performance across 2 common benchmarks
+
+
+
+
Gemma 2 27B
Average Score:58.8%
+
+
+
+
Llama 3.2 11B Instruct
Average Score:62.5%(+3.7%)
+
+
+
+
Knowledge Cutoff
Training data recency comparison
Llama 3.2 11B Instruct
2023-12-31
More recent knowledge cutoff means awareness of newer technologies and frameworks
Provider Availability & Performance
Available providers and their performance metrics
+
+
+
+
Gemma 2 27B
0 providers
+
+
+
+
Llama 3.2 11B Instruct
6 providers
Bedrock
+
+
+
+
Gemma 2 27B
Avg Score:58.8%
Providers:0
+
+
+
+
Llama 3.2 11B Instruct
Avg Score:62.5%(+3.7%)
Providers:6