The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Gemini 2.0 Flash vs Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct

Gemini 2.0 Flash leads the LLM Stats Score 16.5 to 1.1.

Google · NVIDIA · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Gemini 2.0 Flash leads the overall LLM Stats Score 16.5 to 1.1, ranking #203 overall.

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

Choose Gemini 2.0 Flash

  • overall performance matters — it scores 16.5 and ranks #203 on LLM Stats
  • your work emphasizes reasoning — it leads those capability indexes
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Dec 2024

Choose Llama 3.1 Nemotron 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
Google
Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct
NVIDIA
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
16.5
#203
1.1
#302
Reasoning
15.9
#202
0.8
#295
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
—
—
Input price
$0.10 / M
— / M
Output price
$0.40 / M
— / M
Context window
1,048,576
—

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

1 shared
Index
Gemini 2.0 Flash
Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct
Math
23.4#119
7.5#250
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

13 reported for Gemini 2.0 Flash · 11 for Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct

No common benchmarks found

Gemini 2.0 Flash and Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instructdon't have any common benchmark datasets to compare. They may have been evaluated on different testing suites.

Human preference

Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Only Gemini 2.0 Flash specifies input context (1,048,576 tokens). Only Gemini 2.0 Flash specifies output context (8,192 tokens).

Google
Gemini 2.0 Flash
Input1,048,576 tokens
Output8,192 tokens
NVIDIA
Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
Fri Aug 28 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

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

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

Gemini 2.0 Flash

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Gemini 2.0 Flash is licensed under a proprietary license, while Llama 3.1 Nemotron 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

Proprietary

Closed source

Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct

Llama 3.1 Community License

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Gemini 2.0 Flash was released on 2024-12-01, while Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct was released on 2024-10-01.

Gemini 2.0 Flash is 2 months newer than Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct.

Gemini 2.0 Flash

Dec 1, 2024

1.7 years ago

2mo newer
Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct

Oct 1, 2024

1.9 years ago

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Gemini 2.0 Flash has a knowledge cutoff of 2024-08-01, while Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct has a cutoff of 2023-12-01.

Gemini 2.0 Flash has more recent training data (up to 2024-08-01), making it potentially better informed about events through that date compared to Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct (2023-12-01).

Gemini 2.0 Flash

Aug 2024

8 mo newer
Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct

Dec 2023

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion→

Judge for yourself.

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

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

FAQ

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

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

Gemini 2.0 Flash leads the LLM Stats Score 16.5 to 1.1. Gemini 2.0 Flash is made by Google and Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct is made by NVIDIA. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their capability indexes, individual benchmarks, pricing, and limits above.

How does Gemini 2.0 Flash compare to Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct in benchmarks?

Gemini 2.0 Flash scores Natural2Code: 92.9%, MATH: 89.7%, FACTS Grounding: 83.6%, MMLU-Pro: 76.4%, EgoSchema: 71.5%. Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct scores GSM8k: 91.4%, HellaSwag: 85.6%, Winogrande: 84.5%, GSM8K Chat: 81.9%, MMLU Chat: 80.6%.

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

Gemini 2.0 Flash supports 1.0M tokens and Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct supports an unknown number of 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 and Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (16.5 vs 1.1), 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 and Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct?

Gemini 2.0 Flash is developed by Google and Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct is developed by NVIDIA.

Related comparisons