+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
Gemma 3n E4B vs Llama 3.1 8B Instruct
Comprehensive side-by-side LLM comparison
Llama 3.1 8B Instruct leads with 10.2% higher average benchmark score. Gemma 3n E4B supports multimodal inputs. Llama 3.1 8B Instruct is available on 9 providers. Overall, Llama 3.1 8B Instruct is the stronger choice for coding tasks.
+
+
+
+
Gemma 3N E4B was developed as a slightly larger edge-optimized variant, designed to provide enhanced capabilities while still fitting within edge computing constraints. Built to serve applications that can accommodate more parameters for improved quality, it expands the range of edge deployment options.
+
+
+
+
Meta
Llama 3.1 8B was developed as an efficient open-source model, designed to bring capable instruction-following to applications with limited computational resources. Built with 8 billion parameters, it provides a lightweight option for developers seeking reliable performance without the overhead of larger models.
11 months newer
Llama 3.1 8B Instruct
Meta
2024-07-23
Gemma 3n E4B
2025-06-26
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
Performance Metrics
Context window and performance specifications
Average performance across 2 common benchmarks
+
+
+
+
Gemma 3n E4B
Average Score:61.2%
+
+
+
+
Llama 3.1 8B Instruct
Average Score:71.4%(+10.2%)
+
+
+
+
Knowledge Cutoff
Training data recency comparison
Llama 3.1 8B Instruct
2023-12-31
Gemma 3n E4B
2024-06-01
More recent knowledge cutoff means awareness of newer technologies and frameworks
Provider Availability & Performance
Available providers and their performance metrics
+
+
+
+
Gemma 3n E4B
0 providers
+
+
+
+
Llama 3.1 8B Instruct
9 providers
Bedrock
+
+
+
+
Gemma 3n E4B
Avg Score:61.2%
Providers:0
+
+
+
+
Llama 3.1 8B Instruct
Avg Score:71.4%(+10.2%)
Providers:9