Model Comparison
Gemma 4 E2B (Non-reasoning)
vs. Llama 3.2 Instruct 3B
Comparing 2 AI models · 12 benchmarks · Google, Meta
Recommended Pick
Go Gemma 4 E2B (Non-reasoning) 11 metric wins Strongest on: Input price, Output price, TTFT
Lowest Price
Gemma 4 E2B (Non-reasoning)
$0.00/1M input price
Best Reasoning
Gemma 4 E2B (Non-reasoning)
19.0 reasoning score
Blends available reasoning benchmarks
Best for Coding
Gemma 4 E2B (Non-reasoning)
8.3 coding index
Composite Indices
Higher is better; speed and price are normalized
Standard Benchmarks
Only benchmarks with data are shown
Differences That Matter
Price gap
Gemma 4 E2B (Non-reasoning) is ∞x cheaper on input tokens than Llama 3.2 Instruct 3B.
Reasoning gap
Gemma 4 E2B (Non-reasoning) leads Llama 3.2 Instruct 3B by 4.4 points on reasoning.
Top-pick rationale
Gemma 4 E2B (Non-reasoning) wins 11 measurable categories, including Input price, Output price, TTFT, Latency.
Response Face-Off
Run one prompt through the selected models and compare response quality with live speed and cost context.
Gemma 4 E2B (Non-reasoning)
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Llama 3.2 Instruct 3B
Meta
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Which answer was more useful?
Full Comparison
| Metric | Top Pick Go Gemma 4 E2B (Non-reasoning) | Me Llama 3.2 Instruct 3B |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input Cost | $0.00/1M | $0.15/1M |
| Output Cost | $0.00/1M | $0.15/1M |
| Blended (3:1) | — | $0.15/1M |
| Specifications | ||
| Organization | Meta | |
| Release Date | Apr 2, 2026 | Sep 25, 2024 |
| Performance & Speed | ||
| Throughput | — | 52.2 tok/s |
| TTFT | — | 609ms |
| Latency | — | 609ms |
| Composite Indices | ||
| Value Score | — | 100.0 |
| Reasoning Score | 19.0 | 14.7 |
| Intelligence | 12.1 | 9.7 |
| Coding | 8.3 | — |
| Math | — | 3.3 |
| Standard Benchmarks | ||
| GPQA | 40.5% | 25.5% |
| MMLU Pro | — | 34.7% |
| HLE | 4.5% | 5.2% |
| LiveCodeBench | — | 8.3% |
| MATH 500 | — | 48.9% |
| AIME 2025 | — | 3.3% |
| AIME (Original) | — | 6.7% |
| SciCode | 20.4% | 5.2% |
| LCR | 15.0% | 2.0% |
| IFBench | 33.6% | 26.2% |
| TAU-bench v2 | 22.2% | 21.1% |
| TerminalBench Hard | 2.3% | — |
Key Takeaways
Gemma 4 E2B (Non-reasoning) offers the best value at $0.00/1M, making it ideal for high-volume applications and cost-conscious projects.
Gemma 4 E2B (Non-reasoning) has the strongest reasoning profile with a 19.0 reasoning score, combining the available reasoning-heavy benchmarks.
Gemma 4 E2B (Non-reasoning) reaches a 8.3 coding index, making it the top choice for software development and code generation tasks.
All models support context windows of ∞+ tokens, suitable for processing lengthy documents and maintaining extended conversations.
When to Choose Each Model
Gemma 4 E2B (Non-reasoning)
- Cost-sensitive applications
- High-volume processing
- Complex reasoning tasks
- Research & analysis
- Code generation
- Software development
Llama 3.2 Instruct 3B
- General-purpose AI
- Versatile applications
Recommended Comparisons
Popular alternatives
