Gemma 3n E2B Instruct vs Llama 3.1 70B Instruct
Wins 0 of 5 areas
—
Wins 5 of 5 areas
Coding · Reasoning · Facts · Long documents · Following instructions
Llama 3.1 70B Instruct is the stronger all-rounder.
Scores updated · 18 tests both models report · How we compare
Where each one wins
Tests won in each of the five areas where both have results. Each piece is one test, so a longer bar means more evidence; grey means the two scored within a point of each other.
- CodingWriting and fixing software02Llama 3.1 70B Instruct2 of 2 tests
- FactsGetting facts right instead of making them up02Llama 3.1 70B Instruct2 of 2 tests
- ReasoningHard problems that need careful thinking01Llama 3.1 70B Instruct1 of 3 tests · 2 ties
- Long documentsFinding answers in very long texts01Llama 3.1 70B Instruct1 of 1 test
- Following instructionsDoing exactly what it is asked01Llama 3.1 70B Instruct1 of 1 test
Long documents and following instructions rest on a single test each.
What it costs
Prices per million tokens, roughly 750,000 words. The bars show the cost of a million tokens read plus a million written.
The biggest differences
The tests each model wins by the widest margin, up to three each. Scores are out of 100.
Where Llama 3.1 70B Instruct pulls ahead
- Code for real scientific research problemsSciCode+21.5points ahead
- Graduate-level biology, physics and chemistry questionsGPQA Diamond+18points ahead
- Avoids making up answers it doesn't knowAA-Omniscience · Non-hallucination+15.2points ahead
Where Gemma 3n E2B Instruct pulls ahead
No clear win on a test scored out of 100.
Every test, side by side
All 18 tests both models report. The winning score is in its model's colour; marks a score checked independently.
CodingLlama 3.1 70B Instruct
- SciCodeLlama 3.1 70B Instruct by 21.55.226.7+21.5
- Terminal-Bench HardLlama 3.1 70B Instruct by 2.20.83+2.2
ReasoningLlama 3.1 70B Instruct
- GPQA DiamondLlama 3.1 70B Instruct by 1822.940.9+18
- Humanity's Last Examtie4.24.5tie
- CritPttie00tie
FactsLlama 3.1 70B Instruct
- AA-Omniscience · Non-hallucinationLlama 3.1 70B Instruct by 15.26.621.8+15.2
- AA-Omniscience · AccuracyLlama 3.1 70B Instruct by 12.96.819.7+12.9
Long documentsLlama 3.1 70B Instruct
- AA-LCRLlama 3.1 70B Instruct by 808+8
Following instructionsLlama 3.1 70B Instruct
- IFBenchLlama 3.1 70B Instruct by 12.42234.4+12.4
Other results9 tests, not counted
Tests outside the eight areas. They are not counted above: several are summary scores built from other tests, or the same test under another name.
- ARC-ChallengeLlama 3.1 70B Instruct by 43.151.794.8+43.1
- BBHLlama 3.1 70B Instruct by 37.344.381.6+37.3
- AA-OmniscienceLlama 3.1 70B Instruct by 37.1-80.2-43.1+37.1
- DROPLlama 3.1 70B Instruct by 25.753.979.6+25.7
- WinoGrandeLlama 3.1 70B Instruct by 18.566.885.3+18.5
- τ²-Bench Telecom (AA run)Llama 3.1 70B Instruct by 15.2015.2+15.2
- Artificial Analysis Coding IndexLlama 3.1 70B Instruct by 8.72.210.9+8.7
- AA Agentic IndexLlama 3.1 70B Instruct by 5.105.1+5.1
- AA IntelligenceLlama 3.1 70B Instruct by 1.84.86.6+1.8
Questions people ask
Which is better, Gemma 3n E2B Instruct or Llama 3.1 70B Instruct?
Llama 3.1 70B Instruct wins all five areas where both have results: coding, reasoning, facts, long documents and following instructions. Gemma 3n E2B Instruct wins none.
Which is better for coding?
Llama 3.1 70B Instruct. It wins 2 of the 2 coding tests both models report; Gemma 3n E2B Instruct wins none.
How do you compare the two?
We use the 18 benchmark tests both models have published scores on. The verdict counts the 9 tests in the eight capability areas, and a gap under one point (ten on rating-style scales) counts as a tie. The other 9 are listed but not counted, because several are summary scores or repeat a test. Each score is the one shown on the model's own page.