Gemini 2.5 Flash vs Llama 3.3 70B: Detailed Comparison

Choosing between Gemini 2.5 Flash (Google) and Llama 3.3 70B (Meta) comes down to three things: per-token pricing, context window, and which capability matters most for your workload. Gemini 2.5 Flash costs $0.30/M input vs $0.59/M for Llama 3.3 70B; context windows are 1.0M vs 128K tokens. Detailed breakdown below.

Side-by-side specs

SpecGemini 2.5 FlashLlama 3.3 70B
ProviderGoogleMeta
Released2025-04-092024-12-06
Input price $0.30/M $0.59/M
Output price $2.50/M $0.79/M
Cached input $0.0750/M
Context window 1.0M 128K
Max output 66K 8K
Modalities text image audio video text
Tokenizer gemini llama-3

Capability matrix

CapabilityGemini 2.5 FlashLlama 3.3 70B
function calling Yes Yes
json mode Yes Yes
vision Yes No
streaming Yes Yes
audio Yes No
video Yes No
tool use No Yes

Benchmark comparison

Higher is better for all benchmarks shown.

BenchmarkCategoryGemini 2.5 FlashLlama 3.3 70BΔ
MMLU general 86.0
HumanEval coding 88.4

Per-call cost on typical workloads

Workload (in/out tokens)Gemini 2.5 FlashLlama 3.3 70BCheaper by
Standard chat (1K / 500) $0.001550 $0.000985 Llama 3.3 70B by $0.000565
RAG (4K / 500) $0.002450 $0.002755 Gemini 2.5 Flash by $0.000305
Long doc (20K / 1K) $0.008500 $0.012590 Gemini 2.5 Flash by $0.004090
Very long context (100K / 2K) $0.033750 $0.060185 Gemini 2.5 Flash by $0.026435

When to choose Gemini 2.5 Flash over Llama 3.3 70B

  • Per-token input cost is 49% lower — meaningful for high-volume workloads.
  • Larger context window (1.0M vs 128K) — relevant when whole documents or long histories must fit in a single call.
  • Supports vision — Llama 3.3 70B does not.
  • Supports audio — Llama 3.3 70B does not.
  • Supports video — Llama 3.3 70B does not.

When to choose Llama 3.3 70B over Gemini 2.5 Flash

  • Supports tool use — Gemini 2.5 Flash does not.

Related comparisons