The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking vs Llama 3.2 90B Instruct

Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking leads the LLM Stats Score 16.7 to 5.2.

Google · Meta · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking leads the overall LLM Stats Score 16.7 to 5.2, ranking #225 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 #225 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 90B 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 90B Instruct
Meta
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
16.7
#225
5.2
#303
Reasoning
17.0
#218
6.7
#291
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
2 of 2
0 of 2
Input price
— / M
$0.35 / M
Output price
— / M
$0.40 / M
Context window
—
128,000

Individual benchmarks

3 reported for Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking · 13 for Llama 3.2 90B Instruct

2 shared

Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking outperforms in 2 benchmarks (GPQA, MMMU), while Llama 3.2 90B Instruct is better at 0 benchmarks.

Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Sun Sep 27 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 90B Instruct specifies input context (128,000 tokens). Only Llama 3.2 90B Instruct specifies output context (128,000 tokens).

Google
Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
Meta
Llama 3.2 90B Instruct
Input128,000 tokens
Output128,000 tokens
Sun Sep 27 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

Both Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking and Llama 3.2 90B 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 90B 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 90B Instruct uses Llama 3.2.

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 90B Instruct

Llama 3.2

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking was released on 2025-01-21, while Llama 3.2 90B Instruct was released on 2024-09-25.

Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking is 4 months newer than Llama 3.2 90B Instruct.

Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking

Jan 21, 2025

1.7 years ago

3mo newer
Llama 3.2 90B Instruct

Sep 25, 2024

2.0 years ago

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking has a documented knowledge cutoff of 2024-08-01, while Llama 3.2 90B 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 3.2 90B Instruct's cutoff date.

Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking

Aug 2024

Llama 3.2 90B 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 3.2 90B Instruct side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking
✓ Preferred
Llama 3.2 90B Instruct
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking vs Llama 3.2 90B Instruct.

Which is better, Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking or Llama 3.2 90B Instruct?

Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking leads the LLM Stats Score 16.7 to 5.2. Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking 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 2.0 Flash Thinking compare to Llama 3.2 90B Instruct in benchmarks?

Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking scores MMMU: 75.4%, GPQA: 74.2%, AIME 2024: 73.3%. Llama 3.2 90B Instruct scores AI2D: 92.3%, DocVQA: 90.1%, MGSM: 86.9%, MMLU: 86.0%, ChartQA: 85.5%.

What are the context window sizes for Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking and Llama 3.2 90B Instruct?

Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking supports an unknown number of 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 2.0 Flash Thinking and Llama 3.2 90B Instruct?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (16.7 vs 5.2), licensing (Proprietary vs Llama 3.2). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking and Llama 3.2 90B Instruct?

Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking is developed by Google and Llama 3.2 90B Instruct is developed by Meta.

Related comparisons