The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking vs Llama 3.2 11B Instruct

Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking leads the LLM Stats Score 16.7 to -1.3.

Google · Meta · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking leads the overall LLM Stats Score 16.7 to -1.3, ranking #235 overall.

In the 2 individual benchmarks reported for both models, Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking wins 2; 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 16.7 and ranks #235 on LLM Stats
  • your work emphasizes reasoning — it leads those capability indexes
  • you value its reported benchmark strengths — it wins 2 of 2 exact shared results
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Jan 2025

Choose Llama 3.2 11B 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 3.2 11B Instruct
Meta
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
16.7
#235
-1.3
#350
Reasoning
17.0
#228
-0.8
#341
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
2 of 2
0 of 2
Input price
— / M
$0.05 / M
Output price
— / M
$0.05 / M
Context window
—
128,000

Individual benchmarks

3 reported for Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking · 11 for Llama 3.2 11B Instruct

2 shared

Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking outperforms in 2 benchmarks (GPQA, MMMU), while Llama 3.2 11B Instruct is better at 0 benchmarks.

Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Thu Oct 15 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 3.2 11B Instruct specifies input context (128,000 tokens). Only Llama 3.2 11B Instruct specifies output context (128,000 tokens).

Google
Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
Meta
Llama 3.2 11B Instruct
Input128,000 tokens
Output128,000 tokens
Thu Oct 15 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

Both Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking and Llama 3.2 11B Instruct support multimodal inputs.

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

Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Llama 3.2 11B Instruct

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking is licensed under a proprietary license, while Llama 3.2 11B Instruct uses Llama 3.2 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 3.2 11B Instruct

Llama 3.2 Community License

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking was released on 2025-01-21, while Llama 3.2 11B Instruct was released on 2024-09-25.

Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking is 4 months newer than Llama 3.2 11B Instruct.

Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking

Jan 21, 2025

1.7 years ago

3mo newer
Llama 3.2 11B Instruct

Sep 25, 2024

2.0 years ago

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking has a knowledge cutoff of 2024-08-01, while Llama 3.2 11B Instruct has a cutoff of 2023-12-31.

Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking has more recent training data (up to 2024-08-01), making it potentially better informed about events through that date compared to Llama 3.2 11B Instruct (2023-12-31).

Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking

Aug 2024

8 mo newer
Llama 3.2 11B Instruct

Dec 2023

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking and Llama 3.2 11B Instruct side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking
✓ Preferred
Llama 3.2 11B Instruct
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking vs Llama 3.2 11B Instruct.

Which is better, Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking or Llama 3.2 11B Instruct?

Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking leads the LLM Stats Score 16.7 to -1.3. Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking is made by Google and Llama 3.2 11B 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 3.2 11B Instruct in benchmarks?

Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking scores MMMU: 75.4%, GPQA: 74.2%, AIME 2024: 73.3%. Llama 3.2 11B Instruct scores AI2D: 91.1%, DocVQA: 88.4%, ChartQA: 83.4%, VQAv2 (test): 75.2%, MMLU: 73.0%.

What are the context window sizes for Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking and Llama 3.2 11B Instruct?

Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking supports an unknown number of tokens and Llama 3.2 11B 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 3.2 11B Instruct?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (16.7 vs -1.3), licensing (Proprietary vs Llama 3.2 Community License). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking and Llama 3.2 11B Instruct?

Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking is developed by Google and Llama 3.2 11B Instruct is developed by Meta.

Related comparisons