Model Comparison

Gemma 3n E2B Instructed LiteRT (Preview) vs Llama 4 ScoutWhich is better in 2026?

Llama 4 Scout significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Verdict: Gemma 3n E2B Instructed LiteRT (Preview) vs Llama 4 Scout — which is better?

Gemma 3n E2B Instructed LiteRT (Preview) (by Google) and Llama 4 Scout (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 4 Scout is better at 6 benchmarks (GPQA, LiveCodeBench, MBPP, MGSM, MMLU, MMLU-Pro). Llama 4 Scout 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 4 Scout if…

  • you want the strongest raw capability — it leads on 6 of 6 shared benchmarks
Want to compare interactively?Try the playground

Performance Benchmarks

Comparative analysis across standard metrics

6 benchmarks

Gemma 3n E2B Instructed LiteRT (Preview) outperforms in 0 benchmarks, while Llama 4 Scout is better at 6 benchmarks (GPQA, LiveCodeBench, MBPP, MGSM, MMLU, MMLU-Pro).

Llama 4 Scout significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Sun Jun 07 2026 • llm-stats.com

Arena Performance

Human preference votes

Model Size

Parameter count comparison

107.1B diff

Llama 4 Scout has 107.1B more parameters than Gemma 3n E2B Instructed LiteRT (Preview), making it 5606.8% larger.

Google
Gemma 3n E2B Instructed LiteRT (Preview)
1.9Bparameters
Meta
Llama 4 Scout
109.0Bparameters
1.9B
Gemma 3n E2B Instructed LiteRT (Preview)
109.0B
Llama 4 Scout

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Only Llama 4 Scout specifies input context (10,000,000 tokens). Only Llama 4 Scout specifies output context (10,000,000 tokens).

Google
Gemma 3n E2B Instructed LiteRT (Preview)
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
Meta
Llama 4 Scout
Input10,000,000 tokens
Output10,000,000 tokens
Sun Jun 07 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input Capabilities

Supported data types and modalities

Both Gemma 3n E2B Instructed LiteRT (Preview) and Llama 4 Scout 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 4 Scout

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Gemma 3n E2B Instructed LiteRT (Preview) is licensed under Gemma, while Llama 4 Scout uses Llama 4 Community License Agreement.

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 4 Scout

Llama 4 Community License Agreement

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Gemma 3n E2B Instructed LiteRT (Preview) was released on 2025-05-20, while Llama 4 Scout was released on 2025-04-05.

Gemma 3n E2B Instructed LiteRT (Preview) is 2 months newer than Llama 4 Scout.

Gemma 3n E2B Instructed LiteRT (Preview)

May 20, 2025

1.0 years ago

1mo newer
Llama 4 Scout

Apr 5, 2025

1.2 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 4 Scout'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 4 Scout's cutoff date.

Gemma 3n E2B Instructed LiteRT (Preview)

Jun 2024

Llama 4 Scout

—

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 (10,000,000 tokens)
Higher GPQA score (57.2% vs 24.8%)
Higher LiveCodeBench score (32.8% vs 13.2%)
Higher MBPP score (67.8% vs 56.6%)
Higher MGSM score (90.6% vs 53.1%)
Higher MMLU score (79.6% vs 60.1%)
Higher MMLU-Pro score (74.3% vs 40.5%)

Detailed Comparison

AI Model Comparison Table
Feature
Google
Gemma 3n E2B Instructed LiteRT (Preview)
Meta
Llama 4 Scout

FAQ

Common questions about Gemma 3n E2B Instructed LiteRT (Preview) vs Llama 4 Scout.

Which is better, Gemma 3n E2B Instructed LiteRT (Preview) or Llama 4 Scout?

Llama 4 Scout significantly outperforms across most benchmarks. Gemma 3n E2B Instructed LiteRT (Preview) is made by Google and Llama 4 Scout 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 4 Scout 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 4 Scout scores DocVQA: 94.4%, MGSM: 90.6%, ChartQA: 88.8%, MMLU: 79.6%, MMLU-Pro: 74.3%.

What are the context window sizes for Gemma 3n E2B Instructed LiteRT (Preview) and Llama 4 Scout?

Gemma 3n E2B Instructed LiteRT (Preview) supports an unknown number of tokens and Llama 4 Scout supports 10.0M 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 4 Scout?

Key differences include licensing (Gemma vs Llama 4 Community License Agreement). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Gemma 3n E2B Instructed LiteRT (Preview) and Llama 4 Scout?

Gemma 3n E2B Instructed LiteRT (Preview) is developed by Google and Llama 4 Scout is developed by Meta.

Related comparisons