The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Gemini 1.5 Flash 8B vs Llama 3.2 90B Instruct

Llama 3.2 90B Instruct leads the LLM Stats Score 5.3 to -0.6. Gemini 1.5 Flash 8B is 2.8x cheaper per token.

Google · Meta · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Llama 3.2 90B Instruct leads the overall LLM Stats Score 5.3 to -0.6, ranking #288 overall.

In the 4 individual benchmarks reported for both models, Llama 3.2 90B Instruct wins 4; this is a narrower head-to-head signal than the composite indexes.

On price, Gemini 1.5 Flash 8B is roughly 2.8x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.

Gemini 1.5 Flash 8B also accepts a larger context window (1,048,576 input tokens), making it the stronger choice for long documents and large codebases.

Based on current LLM Stats indexes, shared benchmarks, pricing, and model metadata for 2026.

Choose Gemini 1.5 Flash 8B

  • cost matters — it's about 2.8x cheaper per token
  • you process long inputs — it offers a 1,048,576 token context window

Choose Llama 3.2 90B Instruct

  • overall performance matters — it scores 5.3 and ranks #288 on LLM Stats
  • your work emphasizes reasoning — it leads those capability indexes
  • you value its reported benchmark strengths — it wins 4 of 4 exact shared results
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Sep 2024
  • you need open weights you can self-host or fine-tune

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Gemini 1.5 Flash 8B
Google
Llama 3.2 90B Instruct
Meta
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
-0.6
#319
5.3
#288
Reasoning
-0.3
#308
6.7
#273
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
0 of 4
4 of 4
Input price
$0.07 / M
$0.35 / M
Output price
$0.30 / M
$0.40 / M
Context window
1,048,576
128,000

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

3 shared
Index
Gemini 1.5 Flash 8B
Llama 3.2 90B Instruct
Math
2.7#284
11.8#232
Vision
-2.1#186
3.3#161
Multimodal
0.7#148
6.0#132
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

13 reported for Gemini 1.5 Flash 8B · 13 for Llama 3.2 90B Instruct

4 shared

Gemini 1.5 Flash 8B outperforms in 0 benchmarks, while Llama 3.2 90B Instruct is better at 4 benchmarks (GPQA, MATH, MathVista, MMMU).

Llama 3.2 90B Instruct significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Fri Sep 04 2026 • llm-stats.com

Human preference

Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

Gemini 1.5 Flash 8B costs less

For input processing, Gemini 1.5 Flash 8B ($0.07/1M tokens) is 5.0x cheaper than Llama 3.2 90B Instruct ($0.35/1M tokens).

For output processing, Gemini 1.5 Flash 8B ($0.30/1M tokens) is 1.3x cheaper than Llama 3.2 90B Instruct ($0.40/1M tokens).

In conclusion, Llama 3.2 90B Instruct is more expensive than Gemini 1.5 Flash 8B.*

* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens

Lowest available price from all providers
Fri Sep 04 2026 • llm-stats.com
Google
Gemini 1.5 Flash 8B
Input tokens$0.07
Output tokens$0.30
Best providerGoogle
Meta
Llama 3.2 90B Instruct
Input tokens$0.35
Output tokens$0.40
Best providerDeepinfra
Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue→

Model Size

Parameter count comparison

82.0B diff

Llama 3.2 90B Instruct has 82.0B more parameters than Gemini 1.5 Flash 8B, making it 1025.0% larger.

Google
Gemini 1.5 Flash 8B
8.0Bparameters
Meta
Llama 3.2 90B Instruct
90.0Bparameters
8.0B
Gemini 1.5 Flash 8B
90.0B
Llama 3.2 90B Instruct

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Gemini 1.5 Flash 8B accepts 1,048,576 input tokens compared to Llama 3.2 90B Instruct's 128,000 tokens. Llama 3.2 90B Instruct can generate longer responses up to 128,000 tokens, while Gemini 1.5 Flash 8B is limited to 8,192 tokens.

Google
Gemini 1.5 Flash 8B
Input1,048,576 tokens
Output8,192 tokens
Meta
Llama 3.2 90B Instruct
Input128,000 tokens
Output128,000 tokens
Fri Sep 04 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

Both Gemini 1.5 Flash 8B and Llama 3.2 90B Instruct support multimodal inputs.

They are both capable of processing various types of data, offering versatility in application.

Gemini 1.5 Flash 8B

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Llama 3.2 90B Instruct

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Gemini 1.5 Flash 8B is licensed under a proprietary license, while Llama 3.2 90B Instruct uses Llama 3.2.

License differences may affect how you can use these models in commercial or open-source projects.

Gemini 1.5 Flash 8B

Proprietary

Closed source

Llama 3.2 90B Instruct

Llama 3.2

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Gemini 1.5 Flash 8B was released on 2024-03-15, while Llama 3.2 90B Instruct was released on 2024-09-25.

Llama 3.2 90B Instruct is 6 months newer than Gemini 1.5 Flash 8B.

Gemini 1.5 Flash 8B

Mar 15, 2024

2.5 years ago

Llama 3.2 90B Instruct

Sep 25, 2024

1.9 years ago

6mo newer

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Gemini 1.5 Flash 8B has a documented knowledge cutoff of 2024-10-01, while Llama 3.2 90B Instruct's cutoff date is not specified.

We can confirm Gemini 1.5 Flash 8B's training data extends to 2024-10-01, but cannot make a direct comparison without Llama 3.2 90B Instruct's cutoff date.

Gemini 1.5 Flash 8B

Oct 2024

Llama 3.2 90B Instruct

—

Provider Availability

Gemini 1.5 Flash 8B is available from Google. Llama 3.2 90B Instruct is available from DeepInfra, Bedrock, Fireworks, Together, Hyperbolic.

Gemini 1.5 Flash 8B

google logo
Google
Input Price:Input: $0.07/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.30/1M

Llama 3.2 90B Instruct

deepinfra logo
Deepinfra
Input Price:Input: $0.35/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.40/1M
bedrock logo
AWS Bedrock
Input Price:Input: $0.72/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.72/1M
fireworks logo
Fireworks
Input Price:Input: $0.89/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.89/1M
together logo
Together
Input Price:Input: $1.20/1MOutput Price:Output: $1.20/1M
hyperbolic logo
Hyperbolic
Input Price:Input: $2.00/1MOutput Price:Output: $2.00/1M
* Prices shown are per million tokens

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion→

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against Gemini 1.5 Flash 8B and Llama 3.2 90B Instruct side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Gemini 1.5 Flash 8B
✓ Preferred
Llama 3.2 90B Instruct
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Gemini 1.5 Flash 8B vs Llama 3.2 90B Instruct.

Which is better, Gemini 1.5 Flash 8B or Llama 3.2 90B Instruct?

Llama 3.2 90B Instruct leads the LLM Stats Score 5.3 to -0.6. Gemini 1.5 Flash 8B is made by Google and Llama 3.2 90B Instruct is made by Meta. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their capability indexes, individual benchmarks, pricing, and limits above.

How does Gemini 1.5 Flash 8B compare to Llama 3.2 90B Instruct in benchmarks?

Gemini 1.5 Flash 8B scores XSTest: 92.6%, FLEURS: 86.4%, Natural2Code: 75.5%, WMT23: 72.6%, Video-MME: 66.2%. Llama 3.2 90B Instruct scores AI2D: 92.3%, DocVQA: 90.1%, MGSM: 86.9%, MMLU: 86.0%, ChartQA: 85.5%.

Is Gemini 1.5 Flash 8B cheaper than Llama 3.2 90B Instruct?

Gemini 1.5 Flash 8B is 5.0x cheaper for input tokens. Gemini 1.5 Flash 8B costs $0.07/M input and $0.30/M output via google. Llama 3.2 90B Instruct costs $0.35/M input and $0.40/M output via deepinfra.

What are the context window sizes for Gemini 1.5 Flash 8B and Llama 3.2 90B Instruct?

Gemini 1.5 Flash 8B supports 1.0M tokens and Llama 3.2 90B Instruct supports 128K tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.

What are the main differences between Gemini 1.5 Flash 8B and Llama 3.2 90B Instruct?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (-0.6 vs 5.3), context window (1.0M vs 128K), input pricing ($0.07 vs $0.35/M), licensing (Proprietary vs Llama 3.2). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Gemini 1.5 Flash 8B and Llama 3.2 90B Instruct?

Gemini 1.5 Flash 8B is developed by Google and Llama 3.2 90B Instruct is developed by Meta.

Related comparisons