Model Comparison

Gemma 3n E2B vs Llama 3.1 70B InstructWhich is better in 2026?

Llama 3.1 70B Instruct significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Verdict: Gemma 3n E2B vs Llama 3.1 70B Instruct — which is better?

Gemma 3n E2B (by Google) and Llama 3.1 70B 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 outperforms in 0 benchmarks, while Llama 3.1 70B Instruct is better at 2 benchmarks (ARC-C, DROP). Llama 3.1 70B Instruct significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Choose Gemma 3n E2B if…

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

Choose Llama 3.1 70B Instruct if…

  • you want the strongest raw capability — it leads on 2 of 2 shared benchmarks
  • you need open weights you can self-host or fine-tune
Want to compare interactively?Try the playground

Performance Benchmarks

Comparative analysis across standard metrics

2 benchmarks

Gemma 3n E2B outperforms in 0 benchmarks, while Llama 3.1 70B Instruct is better at 2 benchmarks (ARC-C, DROP).

Llama 3.1 70B Instruct significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Sun Jun 07 2026 • llm-stats.com

Arena Performance

Human preference votes

Model Size

Parameter count comparison

62.0B diff

Llama 3.1 70B Instruct has 62.0B more parameters than Gemma 3n E2B, making it 775.0% larger.

Google
Gemma 3n E2B
8.0Bparameters
Meta
Llama 3.1 70B Instruct
70.0Bparameters
8.0B
Gemma 3n E2B
70.0B
Llama 3.1 70B Instruct

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Only Llama 3.1 70B Instruct specifies input context (128,000 tokens). Only Llama 3.1 70B Instruct specifies output context (128,000 tokens).

Google
Gemma 3n E2B
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
Meta
Llama 3.1 70B Instruct
Input128,000 tokens
Output128,000 tokens
Sun Jun 07 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input Capabilities

Supported data types and modalities

Gemma 3n E2B supports multimodal inputs, whereas Llama 3.1 70B Instruct does not.

Gemma 3n E2B can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.

Gemma 3n E2B

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Llama 3.1 70B Instruct

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Gemma 3n E2B is licensed under a proprietary license, while Llama 3.1 70B Instruct uses Llama 3.1 Community License.

License differences may affect how you can use these models in commercial or open-source projects.

Gemma 3n E2B

Proprietary

Closed source

Llama 3.1 70B Instruct

Llama 3.1 Community License

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Gemma 3n E2B was released on 2025-06-26, while Llama 3.1 70B Instruct was released on 2024-07-23.

Gemma 3n E2B is 11 months newer than Llama 3.1 70B Instruct.

Gemma 3n E2B

Jun 26, 2025

11 months ago

11mo newer
Llama 3.1 70B Instruct

Jul 23, 2024

1.9 years ago

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Gemma 3n E2B has a documented knowledge cutoff of 2024-06-01, while Llama 3.1 70B Instruct's cutoff date is not specified.

We can confirm Gemma 3n E2B's training data extends to 2024-06-01, but cannot make a direct comparison without Llama 3.1 70B Instruct's cutoff date.

Gemma 3n E2B

Jun 2024

Llama 3.1 70B Instruct

—

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion→

Key Takeaways

Google
Supports multimodal inputs
Meta
Larger context window (128,000 tokens)
Has open weights
Higher ARC-C score (94.8% vs 51.7%)
Higher DROP score (79.6% vs 53.9%)

Detailed Comparison

AI Model Comparison Table
Feature
Google
Gemma 3n E2B
Meta
Llama 3.1 70B Instruct

FAQ

Common questions about Gemma 3n E2B vs Llama 3.1 70B Instruct.

Which is better, Gemma 3n E2B or Llama 3.1 70B Instruct?

Llama 3.1 70B Instruct significantly outperforms across most benchmarks. Gemma 3n E2B is made by Google and Llama 3.1 70B 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 compare to Llama 3.1 70B Instruct in benchmarks?

Gemma 3n E2B scores PIQA: 78.9%, BoolQ: 76.4%, ARC-E: 75.8%, HellaSwag: 72.2%, Winogrande: 66.8%. Llama 3.1 70B Instruct scores GSM-8K (CoT): 95.1%, ARC-C: 94.8%, API-Bank: 90.0%, IFEval: 87.5%, Multilingual MGSM (CoT): 86.9%.

What are the context window sizes for Gemma 3n E2B and Llama 3.1 70B Instruct?

Gemma 3n E2B supports an unknown number of tokens and Llama 3.1 70B 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 and Llama 3.1 70B Instruct?

Key differences include 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 Gemma 3n E2B and Llama 3.1 70B Instruct?

Gemma 3n E2B is developed by Google and Llama 3.1 70B Instruct is developed by Meta.

Related comparisons