+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
Gemma 3 12B vs Llama 3.2 11B Instruct
Comprehensive side-by-side LLM comparison
Gemma 3 12B leads with 4.8% higher average benchmark score. Gemma 3 12B offers 6.1K more tokens in context window than Llama 3.2 11B Instruct. Both models have similar pricing. Llama 3.2 11B Instruct is available on 6 providers. Both models have their strengths depending on your specific coding needs.
+
+
+
+
Gemma 3 12B was developed as part of the third generation of Google's open-source model family, designed to provide enhanced capabilities in a mid-sized format. Built with improved architecture and training techniques, it balances performance with practical deployment considerations for diverse use cases.
+
+
+
+
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.
5 months newer
Llama 3.2 11B Instruct
Meta
2024-09-25
Gemma 3 12B
2025-03-12
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
Pricing Comparison
Cost per million tokens (USD)
+
+
+
+
Gemma 3 12B
Input:$0.05
Output:$0.10
+
+
+
+
Llama 3.2 11B Instruct
Input:$0.05
Output:$0.05($0.05 cheaper)
Performance Metrics
Context window and performance specifications
Average performance across 5 common benchmarks
+
+
+
+
Gemma 3 12B
Average Score:74.3%(+4.8%)
+
+
+
+
Llama 3.2 11B Instruct
Average Score:69.5%
+
+
+
+
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 3 12B
1 providers
DeepInfra
Throughput: 33 tok/s
Latency: 0.2ms
+
+
+
+
Llama 3.2 11B Instruct
+
+
+
+
Gemma 3 12B
Avg Score:74.3%(+4.8%)
Providers:1
+
+
+
+
Llama 3.2 11B Instruct
Avg Score:69.5%
Providers:6