Gemma 2 9B vs Llama 3.1 8B
Two open-weight models, head to head — task-by-task quality, memory needs, speed and license. Scores are 0-100 from public evaluations; speed and VRAM are computed for a common 12GB card.
Verdict
The Gemma 2 9B is the stronger all-rounder (71 vs 71 average), but pick Gemma 2 9B for multilingual and Llama 3.1 8B for agent. Licenses differ: Gemma 2 9B is Gemma, Llama 3.1 8B is Llama-3.1.
Specs
| Gemma 2 9B | Llama 3.1 8B | |
|---|---|---|
| Parameters | 9.2B | 8B |
| Context | 8K | 128K |
| VRAM (Q4) | 7.3 GB | 6.4 GB |
| Speed on RTX 4070 | 65.7 tok/s | 77.2 tok/s |
| License | Gemma | Llama-3.1 |
| Released | 2024-06 | 2024-07 |
Task-by-task quality
coding
68
68
reasoning
70
70
math
66
66
chat
80
78
multilingual
82
76
agent
62
66
Average7171
Gemma 2 9BLlama 3.1 8B
Can your GPU run them?
Frequently asked
Is Gemma 2 9B or Llama 3.1 8B better?
Overall the Gemma 2 9B edges it on average quality (71 vs 71 across six task areas), but it's use-case dependent — Gemma 2 9B leads on multilingual, while Llama 3.1 8B leads on agent.
Which is better for coding, Gemma 2 9B or Llama 3.1 8B?
They're level on coding (68/100 each).
Which needs more VRAM?
Gemma 2 9B is larger (9.2B vs 8B) and needs more VRAM. At Q4 they need about 7.3 GB and 6.4 GB respectively.
Which is faster?
On a 12GB RTX 4070 at Q4, Gemma 2 9B runs at ~65.7 tok/s and Llama 3.1 8B at ~77.2 tok/s.
More model comparisons
Run the interactive advisor
Auto-detect your exact hardware and get personalised picks, speed & memory.