The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Gemma 2 9B vs Llama 3.2 11B Instruct

Gemma 2 9B and Llama 3.2 11B Instruct are closely matched at -4.8 and -1.2 on the LLM Stats Score.

Google · Meta · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Gemma 2 9B and Llama 3.2 11B Instruct are closely matched on the overall LLM Stats Score at -4.8 and -1.2.

In the 2 individual benchmarks reported for both models, Llama 3.2 11B Instruct 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 Gemma 2 9B

  • you are already invested in the Google ecosystem

Choose Llama 3.2 11B Instruct

  • 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 Sep 2024

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Core performance indexes
-4.8
#341
-1.2
#322
-5.2
#333
-0.7
#312
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
0 of 2
2 of 2
Input price
— / M
$0.05 / M
Output price
— / M
$0.05 / M
Context window
128,000

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

1 shared
Index
Gemma 2 9B
Llama 3.2 11B Instruct
-3.4#305
2.2#285
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

16 reported for Gemma 2 9B · 11 for Llama 3.2 11B Instruct

2 shared

Gemma 2 9B outperforms in 0 benchmarks, while Llama 3.2 11B Instruct is better at 2 benchmarks (MATH, MMLU).

Llama 3.2 11B Instruct significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Sun Sep 06 2026 • llm-stats.com

Human preference

Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores

Model Size

Parameter count comparison

1.4B diff

Llama 3.2 11B Instruct has 1.4B more parameters than Gemma 2 9B, making it 14.7% larger.

Google
Gemma 2 9B
9.2Bparameters
Meta
Llama 3.2 11B Instruct
10.6Bparameters
9.2B
Gemma 2 9B
10.6B
Llama 3.2 11B Instruct

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
Gemma 2 9B
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
Meta
Llama 3.2 11B Instruct
Input128,000 tokens
Output128,000 tokens
Sun Sep 06 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

Llama 3.2 11B Instruct supports multimodal inputs, whereas Gemma 2 9B does not.

Llama 3.2 11B Instruct can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.

Gemma 2 9B

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Llama 3.2 11B Instruct

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Gemma 2 9B is licensed under Gemma, 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.

Gemma 2 9B

Gemma

Open weights

Llama 3.2 11B Instruct

Llama 3.2 Community License

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Gemma 2 9B was released on 2024-06-27, while Llama 3.2 11B Instruct was released on 2024-09-25.

Llama 3.2 11B Instruct is 3 months newer than Gemma 2 9B.

Gemma 2 9B

Jun 27, 2024

2.2 years ago

Llama 3.2 11B Instruct

Sep 25, 2024

1.9 years ago

3mo newer

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Llama 3.2 11B Instruct has a documented knowledge cutoff of 2023-12-31, while Gemma 2 9B's cutoff date is not specified.

We can confirm Llama 3.2 11B Instruct's training data extends to 2023-12-31, but cannot make a direct comparison without Gemma 2 9B's cutoff date.

Gemma 2 9B

Llama 3.2 11B Instruct

Dec 2023

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against Gemma 2 9B and Llama 3.2 11B Instruct side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Gemma 2 9B
✓ Preferred
Llama 3.2 11B Instruct
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Gemma 2 9B vs Llama 3.2 11B Instruct.

Which is better, Gemma 2 9B or Llama 3.2 11B Instruct?

Gemma 2 9B and Llama 3.2 11B Instruct are closely matched on the LLM Stats Score at -4.8 and -1.2. Gemma 2 9B 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 Gemma 2 9B compare to Llama 3.2 11B Instruct in benchmarks?

Gemma 2 9B scores ARC-E: 88.0%, BoolQ: 84.2%, HellaSwag: 81.9%, PIQA: 81.7%, Winogrande: 80.6%. 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 Gemma 2 9B and Llama 3.2 11B Instruct?

Gemma 2 9B 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 Gemma 2 9B and Llama 3.2 11B Instruct?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (-4.8 vs -1.2), multimodal support (no vs yes), licensing (Gemma vs Llama 3.2 Community License). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Gemma 2 9B and Llama 3.2 11B Instruct?

Gemma 2 9B is developed by Google and Llama 3.2 11B Instruct is developed by Meta.