Model Comparison

Gemma 3n E2B Instructed LiteRT (Preview) vs Llama 3.2 90B InstructWhich is better in 2026?

Llama 3.2 90B Instruct significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Verdict: Gemma 3n E2B Instructed LiteRT (Preview) vs Llama 3.2 90B Instruct — which is better?

Gemma 3n E2B Instructed LiteRT (Preview) (by Google) and Llama 3.2 90B Instruct (by Meta) are two of the AI models people compare most. Here is how they stack up on benchmarks, price and capabilities, and which one to pick in 2026.

Gemma 3n E2B Instructed LiteRT (Preview) outperforms in 0 benchmarks, while Llama 3.2 90B Instruct is better at 3 benchmarks (GPQA, MGSM, MMLU). Llama 3.2 90B Instruct significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Choose Gemma 3n E2B Instructed LiteRT (Preview) if…

  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped May 2025

Choose Llama 3.2 90B Instruct if…

  • you want the strongest raw capability — it leads on 3 of 3 shared benchmarks
Want to compare interactively?Try the playground

Performance Benchmarks

Comparative analysis across standard metrics

3 benchmarks

Gemma 3n E2B Instructed LiteRT (Preview) outperforms in 0 benchmarks, while Llama 3.2 90B Instruct is better at 3 benchmarks (GPQA, MGSM, MMLU).

Llama 3.2 90B Instruct significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Tue Jun 16 2026 • llm-stats.com

Arena Performance

Human preference votes

Model Size

Parameter count comparison

88.1B diff

Llama 3.2 90B Instruct has 88.1B more parameters than Gemma 3n E2B Instructed LiteRT (Preview), making it 4612.0% larger.

Google
Gemma 3n E2B Instructed LiteRT (Preview)
1.9Bparameters
Meta
Llama 3.2 90B Instruct
90.0Bparameters
1.9B
Gemma 3n E2B Instructed LiteRT (Preview)
90.0B
Llama 3.2 90B Instruct

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
Gemma 3n E2B Instructed LiteRT (Preview)
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
Meta
Llama 3.2 90B Instruct
Input128,000 tokens
Output128,000 tokens
Tue Jun 16 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input Capabilities

Supported data types and modalities

Both Gemma 3n E2B Instructed LiteRT (Preview) and Llama 3.2 90B Instruct support multimodal inputs.

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

Gemma 3n E2B Instructed LiteRT (Preview)

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Llama 3.2 90B Instruct

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Gemma 3n E2B Instructed LiteRT (Preview) is licensed under Gemma, 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.

Gemma 3n E2B Instructed LiteRT (Preview)

Gemma

Open weights

Llama 3.2 90B Instruct

Llama 3.2

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Gemma 3n E2B Instructed LiteRT (Preview) was released on 2025-05-20, while Llama 3.2 90B Instruct was released on 2024-09-25.

Gemma 3n E2B Instructed LiteRT (Preview) is 8 months newer than Llama 3.2 90B Instruct.

Gemma 3n E2B Instructed LiteRT (Preview)

May 20, 2025

1.1 years ago

7mo newer
Llama 3.2 90B Instruct

Sep 25, 2024

1.7 years ago

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Gemma 3n E2B Instructed LiteRT (Preview) has a documented knowledge cutoff of 2024-06-01, while Llama 3.2 90B Instruct's cutoff date is not specified.

We can confirm Gemma 3n E2B Instructed LiteRT (Preview)'s training data extends to 2024-06-01, but cannot make a direct comparison without Llama 3.2 90B Instruct's cutoff date.

Gemma 3n E2B Instructed LiteRT (Preview)

Jun 2024

Llama 3.2 90B Instruct

—

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion→

Key Takeaways

Google

No standout differentiators in the data we have for this pair.

Meta
Larger context window (128,000 tokens)
Higher GPQA score (46.7% vs 24.8%)
Higher MGSM score (86.9% vs 53.1%)
Higher MMLU score (86.0% vs 60.1%)

Detailed Comparison

AI Model Comparison Table
Feature
Google
Gemma 3n E2B Instructed LiteRT (Preview)
Meta
Llama 3.2 90B Instruct

FAQ

Common questions about Gemma 3n E2B Instructed LiteRT (Preview) vs Llama 3.2 90B Instruct.

Which is better, Gemma 3n E2B Instructed LiteRT (Preview) or Llama 3.2 90B Instruct?

Llama 3.2 90B Instruct significantly outperforms across most benchmarks. Gemma 3n E2B Instructed LiteRT (Preview) is made by Google and Llama 3.2 90B Instruct is made by Meta. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their benchmark scores, pricing, and capabilities above.

How does Gemma 3n E2B Instructed LiteRT (Preview) compare to Llama 3.2 90B Instruct in benchmarks?

Gemma 3n E2B Instructed LiteRT (Preview) scores PIQA: 78.9%, BoolQ: 76.4%, ARC-E: 75.8%, HellaSwag: 72.2%, Winogrande: 66.8%. 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 Gemma 3n E2B Instructed LiteRT (Preview) and Llama 3.2 90B Instruct?

Gemma 3n E2B Instructed LiteRT (Preview) 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 Gemma 3n E2B Instructed LiteRT (Preview) and Llama 3.2 90B Instruct?

Key differences include licensing (Gemma vs Llama 3.2). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Gemma 3n E2B Instructed LiteRT (Preview) and Llama 3.2 90B Instruct?

Gemma 3n E2B Instructed LiteRT (Preview) is developed by Google and Llama 3.2 90B Instruct is developed by Meta.

Related comparisons