The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking vs Llama 3.1 70B Instruct

Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking leads the LLM Stats Score 17.0 to 7.7.

Google · Meta · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking leads the overall LLM Stats Score 17.0 to 7.7, ranking #207 overall.

In the 1 individual benchmarks reported for both models, Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking wins 1; this is a narrower head-to-head signal than the composite indexes.

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

Choose Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking

  • overall performance matters — it scores 17.0 and ranks #207 on LLM Stats
  • your work emphasizes reasoning — it leads those capability indexes
  • you value its reported benchmark strengths — it wins 1 of 1 exact shared results
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Jan 2025

Choose Llama 3.1 70B Instruct

  • you need open weights you can self-host or fine-tune

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking
Google
Llama 3.1 70B Instruct
Meta
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
17.0
#207
7.7
#276
Reasoning
17.2
#199
6.4
#276
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
1 of 1
0 of 1
Input price
— / M
$0.20 / M
Output price
— / M
$0.20 / M
Context window
—
128,000

Individual benchmarks

3 reported for Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking · 18 for Llama 3.1 70B Instruct

1 shared

Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking outperforms in 1 benchmarks (GPQA), while Llama 3.1 70B Instruct is better at 0 benchmarks.

Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Tue Sep 08 2026 • llm-stats.com

Human preference

Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Only Llama 3.1 70B Instruct specifies input context (128,000 tokens). Only Llama 3.1 70B Instruct specifies output context (128,000 tokens).

Google
Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
Meta
Llama 3.1 70B Instruct
Input128,000 tokens
Output128,000 tokens
Tue Sep 08 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking supports multimodal inputs, whereas Llama 3.1 70B Instruct does not.

Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.

Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Llama 3.1 70B Instruct

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking is licensed under a proprietary license, while Llama 3.1 70B Instruct uses Llama 3.1 Community License.

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

Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking

Proprietary

Closed source

Llama 3.1 70B Instruct

Llama 3.1 Community License

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking was released on 2025-01-21, while Llama 3.1 70B Instruct was released on 2024-07-23.

Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking is 6 months newer than Llama 3.1 70B Instruct.

Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking

Jan 21, 2025

1.6 years ago

6mo newer
Llama 3.1 70B Instruct

Jul 23, 2024

2.1 years ago

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking has a documented knowledge cutoff of 2024-08-01, while Llama 3.1 70B Instruct's cutoff date is not specified.

We can confirm Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking's training data extends to 2024-08-01, but cannot make a direct comparison without Llama 3.1 70B Instruct's cutoff date.

Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking

Aug 2024

Llama 3.1 70B Instruct

—

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion→

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking and Llama 3.1 70B Instruct side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking
✓ Preferred
Llama 3.1 70B Instruct
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking vs Llama 3.1 70B Instruct.

Which is better, Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking or Llama 3.1 70B Instruct?

Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking leads the LLM Stats Score 17.0 to 7.7. Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking is made by Google and Llama 3.1 70B 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 2.0 Flash Thinking compare to Llama 3.1 70B Instruct in benchmarks?

Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking scores MMMU: 75.4%, GPQA: 74.2%, AIME 2024: 73.3%. Llama 3.1 70B Instruct scores GSM-8K (CoT): 95.1%, ARC-C: 94.8%, API-Bank: 90.0%, IFEval: 87.5%, Multilingual MGSM (CoT): 86.9%.

What are the context window sizes for Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking and Llama 3.1 70B Instruct?

Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking supports an unknown number of tokens and Llama 3.1 70B 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 2.0 Flash Thinking and Llama 3.1 70B Instruct?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (17.0 vs 7.7), multimodal support (yes vs no), licensing (Proprietary vs Llama 3.1 Community License). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking and Llama 3.1 70B Instruct?

Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking is developed by Google and Llama 3.1 70B Instruct is developed by Meta.

Related comparisons