Gemini 2.5 Pro vs Llama 3.3 70B
Side-by-side benchmark comparison across coding, math, reasoning, speed, and pricing.
Gemini 2.5 Pro by Google wins on 16 of 20 benchmarks against Llama 3.3 70B by Meta, which leads on 4. This head-to-head comparison covers coding, math, reasoning, speed, and pricing metrics from our benchmark data.
Category-by-Category Breakdown
General Intelligence: In general intelligence, Gemini 2.5 Pro scores 1465 on Chatbot Arena ELO compared to Llama 3.3 70B's 1210, while Gemini 2.5 Pro scores 84.0% on MMLU-Pro compared to Llama 3.3 70B's 60.0%, while Gemini 2.5 Pro scores 9.3 on MT-Bench compared to Llama 3.3 70B's 8.6, while Gemini 2.5 Pro scores 84.8% on TruthfulQA compared to Llama 3.3 70B's 73.5%.
Coding: In coding, Gemini 2.5 Pro scores 89.0% on HumanEval+ compared to Llama 3.3 70B's 72.0%, while Gemini 2.5 Pro scores 63.8% on SWE-bench Verified compared to Llama 3.3 70B's 22.0%, while Gemini 2.5 Pro scores 58.0% on LiveCodeBench compared to Llama 3.3 70B's 26.0%, while Gemini 2.5 Pro scores 33.3 on AA Coding Index compared to Llama 3.3 70B's 11.9.
Math: In math, Gemini 2.5 Pro scores 88.0% on MATH compared to Llama 3.3 70B's 60.0%, while Gemini 2.5 Pro scores 95.5% on GSM8K compared to Llama 3.3 70B's 82.0%.
Reasoning: In reasoning, Gemini 2.5 Pro scores 84.0% on GPQA Diamond compared to Llama 3.3 70B's 34.0%, while Gemini 2.5 Pro scores 48.0% on ARC-AGI compared to Llama 3.3 70B's 10.0%, while Gemini 2.5 Pro scores 94.5% on BBH compared to Llama 3.3 70B's 81.5%, while Gemini 2.5 Pro scores 92.0% on Winogrande compared to Llama 3.3 70B's 85.5%.
Context: In context, Gemini 2.5 Pro scores 1.0M on Context Length compared to Llama 3.3 70B's 131K.
Multimodal: In multimodal, Gemini 2.5 Pro scores 80.4% on MathVista compared to Llama 3.3 70B's 58.2%.
Pricing Comparison
Gemini 2.5 Pro costs $1.3/1M input tokens and $10.0/1M output tokens, while Llama 3.3 70B costs $0.10/1M input and $0.32/1M output. Llama 3.3 70B is the more affordable option for API usage.
Speed Comparison
Gemini 2.5 Pro generates output at 55 tok/s compared to Llama 3.3 70B's 90 tok/s, and the time to first token is 500 ms for Gemini 2.5 Pro versus 300 ms for Llama 3.3 70B. Llama 3.3 70B delivers faster throughput.
Verdict
For developers prioritizing coding and general intelligence and math, Gemini 2.5 Pro has the edge. For those who value affordability and speed, Llama 3.3 70B is the stronger choice.
View Individual Model Pages
Gemini 2.5 Pro vs Llama 3.3 70B — FAQ
Which is better, Gemini 2.5 Pro or Llama 3.3 70B?
Gemini 2.5 Pro wins on more benchmarks overall (16 vs 4). However, the best choice depends on your specific needs — each model excels in different areas.
How does Gemini 2.5 Pro compare to Llama 3.3 70B for coding?
Gemini 2.5 Pro is better for coding, scoring 63.8% on SWE-bench Verified compared to 22.0%. SWE-bench tests real-world software engineering by resolving actual GitHub issues.
Is Gemini 2.5 Pro cheaper than Llama 3.3 70B?
Yes, Llama 3.3 70B is cheaper. Gemini 2.5 Pro costs $1.3/1M input and $10.0/1M output tokens. Llama 3.3 70B costs $0.10/1M input and $0.32/1M output tokens.
Which is faster, Gemini 2.5 Pro or Llama 3.3 70B?
Llama 3.3 70B is faster, generating output at 90 tok/s compared to 55 tok/s. Faster output speed means shorter wait times for API responses.
What benchmarks does the Gemini 2.5 Pro vs Llama 3.3 70B comparison cover?
This comparison covers 20 benchmarks including Chatbot Arena ELO, MMLU-Pro, HumanEval+, MT-Bench, MATH, TruthfulQA, GPQA Diamond, SWE-bench Verified, and more. Metrics span general intelligence, coding, math, reasoning, speed, and cost categories.