+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
Gemma 2 27B vs Llama 3.2 90B Instruct
Comprehensive side-by-side LLM comparison
Gemma 2 27B leads with 6.6% higher average benchmark score. Llama 3.2 90B Instruct supports multimodal inputs. Llama 3.2 90B Instruct is available on 5 providers. Overall, Gemma 2 27B is the stronger choice for coding tasks.
+
+
+
+
Gemma 2 27B is a language model developed by Google. It achieves strong performance with an average score of 69.1% across 16 benchmarks. It excels particularly in ARC-E (88.6%), HellaSwag (86.4%), BoolQ (84.8%). It's licensed for commercial use, making it suitable for enterprise applications. Released in 2024, it represents Google's latest advancement in AI technology.
+
+
+
+
Meta
Llama 3.2 90B Instruct is a multimodal language model developed by Meta. It achieves strong performance with an average score of 71.3% across 13 benchmarks. It excels particularly in AI2D (92.3%), DocVQA (90.1%), MGSM (86.9%). It supports a 256K token context window for handling large documents. The model is available through 5 API providers. As a multimodal model, it can process and understand text, images, and other input formats seamlessly. It's licensed for commercial use, making it suitable for enterprise applications. Released in 2024, it represents Meta's latest advancement in AI technology.
3 months newer
Gemma 2 27B
2024-06-27
Llama 3.2 90B Instruct
Meta
2024-09-25
Performance Metrics
Context window and performance specifications
Average performance across 27 common benchmarks
+
+
+
+
Gemma 2 27B
Average Score:41.0%(+6.6%)
+
+
+
+
Llama 3.2 90B Instruct
Average Score:34.3%
Provider Availability & Performance
Available providers and their performance metrics
+
+
+
+
Gemma 2 27B
0 providers
+
+
+
+
Llama 3.2 90B Instruct
5 providers
Bedrock
+
+
+
+
Gemma 2 27B
Avg Score:41.0%(+6.6%)
Providers:0
+
+
+
+
Llama 3.2 90B Instruct
Avg Score:34.3%
Providers:5