Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Gemma 3 12B vs Llama 3.2 1B Instruct

Llama 3.2 1B Instruct leads Gemma 3 12B on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 4.8 to 3.8, and Gemma 3 12B costs 1.2x less per output token ($0.1625 vs $0.201 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 36 benchmarks have a result for both.

Replace Gemma 3 12B Replace Llama 3.2 1B Instruct
Gemma 3 12BGoogle
Coding
No data
Overall
28.0
Output $/M
$0.1625
34
Llama 3.2 1B InstructMeta Llama
Coding
No data
Overall
9.6
Output $/M
$0.201
2
vs boards won of 36 shared

Gemma 3 12B or Llama 3.2 1B Instruct: which to pick

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick Gemma 3 12B for output tokens 1.2x cheaper ($0.1625 vs $0.201 per million) and a larger context window (131K against 60K tokens).

Model AGemma 3 12BGoogleNot benchmarkedNo coding benchmarkNo cost per solved taskModel BLlama 3.2 1B InstructMeta LlamaNot benchmarkedNo coding benchmarkNo cost per solved task
Shared results
36
Gemma 3 12B only
7
Llama 3.2 1B Instruct only
2
Like-for-like categories
7 of 9

Only benchmarks that tested both models count toward a pick; a result only one model has is shown but not compared.

Which one for your work

Each card is decided by one number both models carry. Where only one has it, the card says so and makes no call.

At a glance

Coding index
Gemma 3 12B not benchmarked, Llama 3.2 1B Instruct not benchmarked.
Widest category
Knowledge, 52.0 points apart on average over 5 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
LMArena Text: business and finance: Gemma 3 12B 1376 against Llama 3.2 1B Instruct 1000, 62.7 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Gemma 3 12B $0.1625 against Llama 3.2 1B Instruct $0.201 per million output tokens, 1.2x apart.
Context window
Gemma 3 12B takes 131K tokens, Llama 3.2 1B Instruct 60K.

Benchmark by benchmark

First the score: boards each model leads, per category, where both have a result. Then every board, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale, so compare the two in a row, not one row with another.

Boards won, where both have a result
CategoryGemma 3 12BBarsLlama 3.2 1B InstructTies
Coding40
Intelligence01
Agentic work20
Reasoning51
Math50
Knowledge50
General130
All shared boards342
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index40
Coding benchmarks for Gemma 3 12B and Llama 3.2 1B Instruct
BenchmarkGemma 3 12BLlama 3.2 1B InstructLeader
AA Coding Index5.8Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 12B measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)13.7%1.9%Gemma 3 12B
SciCode16.4%Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 12B measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)0.8%0.0%Gemma 3 12B
LMArena Text: coding12811070Gemma 3 12B
LMArena Text: software and IT13131056Gemma 3 12B
SciCode0.0%Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 12B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 32 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Intelligence benchmarks for Gemma 3 12B and Llama 3.2 1B Instruct
BenchmarkGemma 3 12BLlama 3.2 1B InstructLeader
AA Intelligence Index3.84.8Llama 3.2 1B Instruct
Epoch Capabilities Index123.5Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 12B measured
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
Agentic work benchmarks for Gemma 3 12B and Llama 3.2 1B Instruct
BenchmarkGemma 3 12BLlama 3.2 1B InstructLeader
AA Agentic Index0.1Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 12B measured
τ²-Bench Telecom10.8%0.0%Gemma 3 12B
BALROGNot measured6.6%Only Llama 3.2 1B Instruct measured
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL)30.4%10.8%Gemma 3 12B
Neither model has a result on the other 37 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index51
Reasoning benchmarks for Gemma 3 12B and Llama 3.2 1B Instruct
BenchmarkGemma 3 12BLlama 3.2 1B InstructLeader
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)34.9%19.6%Gemma 3 12B
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)4.2%5.5%Llama 3.2 1B Instruct
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)39.5%23.9%Gemma 3 12B
LMArena Text: hard prompts13091044Gemma 3 12B
LMArena Text: expert12481007Gemma 3 12B
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English13181087Gemma 3 12B
Neither model has a result on the other 16 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index50
Math benchmarks for Gemma 3 12B and Llama 3.2 1B Instruct
BenchmarkGemma 3 12BLlama 3.2 1B InstructLeader
AA Math Index18.30.0Gemma 3 12B
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)18.3%0.0%Gemma 3 12B
OTIS Mock AIME16.7%0.6%Gemma 3 12B
LMArena Text: math13071086Gemma 3 12B
LMArena Text: mathematical work13361098Gemma 3 12B
Neither model has a result on the other 8 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index50
Knowledge benchmarks for Gemma 3 12B and Llama 3.2 1B Instruct
BenchmarkGemma 3 12BLlama 3.2 1B InstructLeader
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)59.5%20.0%Gemma 3 12B
LMArena Text: science13661055Gemma 3 12B
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare13341009Gemma 3 12B
LMArena Text: legal and government13811071Gemma 3 12B
LMArena Text: business and finance13761000Gemma 3 12B
Neither model has a result on the other 13 boards here
Web designNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for Gemma 3 12B and Llama 3.2 1B Instruct
BenchmarkGemma 3 12BLlama 3.2 1B InstructLeader
Neither model has a result on 9 boards here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index130
General benchmarks for Gemma 3 12B and Llama 3.2 1B Instruct
BenchmarkGemma 3 12BLlama 3.2 1B InstructLeader
IFBench36.7%22.8%Gemma 3 12B
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)8.3%6.7%Gemma 3 12B
DTBench48.8%Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 12B measured
LMCA4.5%Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 12B measured
LMArena Text13341055Gemma 3 12B
LMArena Text: instruction following12991031Gemma 3 12B
LMArena Text: creative writing13311033Gemma 3 12B
LMArena Text: English13491117Gemma 3 12B
LMArena Text: non-English1318973Gemma 3 12B
LMArena Text: ChineseNot measured959Only Llama 3.2 1B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: German13701014Gemma 3 12B
LMArena Text: Russian1335941Gemma 3 12B
LMArena Text: multi-turn13341030Gemma 3 12B
LMArena Text: longer queries13171050Gemma 3 12B
LMArena Text: writing and language13071030Gemma 3 12B
LMArena Text: entertainment and media12971025Gemma 3 12B
Neither model has a result on the other 30 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for Gemma 3 12B and Llama 3.2 1B Instruct
BenchmarkGemma 3 12BLlama 3.2 1B InstructLeader
Neither model has a result on 5 boards here

What each workload costs

Three fixed token mixes at each model's listed price, so per-token rates become a bill.

Chat turn

1K input + 500 output tokens

Gemma 3 12B$0.0002Fits in one request
Llama 3.2 1B Instruct$0.0001Fits in one request

Llama 3.2 1B Instruct costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Gemma 3 12B$0.0042Fits in one request
Llama 3.2 1B Instruct$0.0020Fits in one request

Llama 3.2 1B Instruct costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Gemma 3 12B$0.017Exceeds the context window
Llama 3.2 1B Instruct$0.0074Exceeds the context window

Llama 3.2 1B Instruct costs less

Listed OpenRouter rates, without cache or batch discounts. A workload that does not fit a model's context window would need splitting.

Specification differences

The leading value in a row is marked; a row with a missing value names no leader. Our two rows are marked in red.

Specifications of Gemma 3 12B and Llama 3.2 1B Instruct
SpecificationGoogle Gemma 3 12BMeta Llama 3.2 1B Instruct
MakerGoogleMeta Llama
WeightsOpen weightsOpen weights
ReleasedMarch 13, 2025September 25, 2024
Context window131K60K
Input $/Mtok$0.075$0.027
Output $/Mtok$0.1625$0.201
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it00
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Gemma 3 12B better than Llama 3.2 1B Instruct for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Gemma 3 12B for output tokens 1.2x cheaper ($0.1625 vs $0.201 per million) and a larger context window (131K against 60K tokens).

Which is cheaper, Gemma 3 12B or Llama 3.2 1B Instruct?

Gemma 3 12B costs $0.075 per million input tokens and $0.1625 per million output tokens; Llama 3.2 1B Instruct costs $0.027 and $0.201. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, Gemma 3 12B or Llama 3.2 1B Instruct?

Gemma 3 12B, with 131K tokens against 60K.

How many benchmarks is the Gemma 3 12B vs Llama 3.2 1B Instruct comparison based on?

36 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. Gemma 3 12B's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and Llama 3.2 1B Instruct's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next