Gemma 3 4B IT vs Llama-3.2-1B
Gemma 3 4B IT comes out ahead, 43 to 34 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.
- Our pick
GoogleGemma 3 4B IT
43/100- ECI115.8
- Price$0.05 / $0.10
- Context131K
MetaLlama-3.2-1B
34/100- ECI—
- Price$0.027 / $0.201
- Context131K
Add a model
Make it a three-way comparison.
Gemma 3 4B IT is our pick
Gemma 3 4B IT is the better all-round choice, scoring 43/100 against Llama-3.2-1B (34). It leads on capability and inputs & features. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%. Capability uses the average of shared benchmarks (GPQA Diamond and OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025), because Llama-3.2-1B has no Capabilities Index score yet.
- CapabilityGemma 3 4B ITShared benchmarks: Gemma 3 4B IT 15.4% · Llama-3.2-1B 12.2%
- Lowest priceGemma 3 4B ITGemma 3 4B IT $0.063 · Llama-3.2-1B $0.07 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextAbout the sameGemma 3 4B IT 131,072 · Llama-3.2-1B 131,072 tokens
- Widest inputsGemma 3 4B ITGemma 3 4B IT: Text, Images · Llama-3.2-1B: Text
- Self-hostingAll open weightsEvery model here can be downloaded and run on your own hardware
| Measure | Weight | Gemma 3 4B IT | Llama-3.2-1B |
|---|---|---|---|
| CapabilityShared benchmarks | 50% | 15 | 12 |
| Price | 25% | 100 | 100 |
| Inputs & features | 15% | 50 | 0 |
| Context window | 10% | 25 | 25 |
| Overall | 100% | 43/100 | 34/100 |
Every spec in one table
Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.
| Specification | Gemma 3 4B ITGoogle | Llama-3.2-1BMeta |
|---|---|---|
| Capability | ||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | 115.8 | — |
| ECI rank | #163 of 165 | — |
| GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions | 23.2% | 23.9% (best) |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics | 7.5% (best) | 0.6% |
| Price per million tokens | ||
| Input | $0.05 | $0.027 (best) |
| Output | $0.10 (best) | $0.201 |
| Cached input | — | — |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.063 (best) | $0.07 |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Median of 9 providers | Median of 6 providers |
| Limits | ||
| Context window | 131,072 tokens | 131,072 tokens |
| Max output | 131,072 tokens (best) | 8,192 tokens |
| Inputs and features | ||
| Text | Yes | Yes |
| Images | Yes | No |
| PDFs | No | No |
| Audio | No | No |
| Video | No | No |
| Reasoning | No | No |
| Tool calling | Yes | No |
| Structured output | No | No |
| Availability | ||
| Weights | Open | OpenLlama 3.2 Community License |
| API model ID | — | — |
| API providers | 10 (best) | 6 |
| Released | Mar 12, 2025 | Sep 25, 2024 |
| Knowledge cutoff | Aug 2024 | Dec 2023 |
What would a month cost?
Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.
- Gemma 3 4B IT$0.70
- Llama-3.2-1B$0.672
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Gemma 3 4B IT or Llama-3.2-1B?
Gemma 3 4B IT is the better all-round choice, scoring 43/100 against Llama-3.2-1B (34). It leads on capability and inputs & features. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%. Capability uses the average of shared benchmarks (GPQA Diamond and OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025), because Llama-3.2-1B has no Capabilities Index score yet.
Which is cheaper, Gemma 3 4B IT or Llama-3.2-1B?
Gemma 3 4B IT is cheaper at $0.05 input / $0.10 output per million tokens (median across 9 API providers). Llama-3.2-1B costs $0.027 input / $0.201 output per million tokens (median across 6 API providers). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.063 per million tokens for Gemma 3 4B IT versus $0.07 for Llama-3.2-1B (1.1× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
Not every model here has a Capabilities Index score, so we compare the average of shared benchmarks (GPQA Diamond and OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025): Gemma 3 4B IT 15.4% and Llama-3.2-1B 12.2%. On individual benchmarks: GPQA Diamond — Llama-3.2-1B 23.9%, Gemma 3 4B IT 23.2%; OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025 — Gemma 3 4B IT 7.5%, Llama-3.2-1B 0.6%.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Gemma 3 4B IT and Llama-3.2-1B yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. On overall capability, Gemma 3 4B IT leads, which tends to carry over to coding, but test on your own codebase. Note that Llama-3.2-1B does not support tool calling, which most coding agents need.
Which has the bigger context window?
Gemma 3 4B IT and Llama-3.2-1B share the same 131,072-token context window. Maximum output per response: Gemma 3 4B IT up to 131,072, Llama-3.2-1B up to 8,192 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Gemma 3 4B IT accepts text and images; Llama-3.2-1B accepts text. Gemma 3 4B IT handles the widest range of inputs.
Are any of these open source?
Yes, both publish their weights (Llama 3.2 Community License), so you can self-host them.
Which is newer?
Gemma 3 4B IT is the newest, released Mar 12, 2025. Llama-3.2-1B came out Sep 25, 2024. Knowledge cutoff: Gemma 3 4B IT Aug 2024, Llama-3.2-1B Dec 2023.
How do you decide the winner?
Each model gets a 0–100 score on capability (50%, independent benchmark results); price (25%, blended price per million tokens (3 input : 1 output), log scale); inputs & features (15%, image, PDF, audio and video input, tool calling, structured output and reasoning); context window (10%, maximum tokens per request, log scale). Dimensions missing for any model are dropped and the remaining weights rescaled, so every model is judged on the same evidence. Specs and prices come from public model listings and the labs’ own API pages; capability scores come from independent benchmark runs. Data updated Nov 2, 2026.
Related comparisons
- Add Qwen2.5 7B InstructThree-way comparison
- Gemma 3 4B IT vs Qwen2.5 7B InstructAlibaba (Qwen) · ECI 118.5
- Gemma 3 4B IT vs Mistral NemoMistral AI · ECI 118.6
- Gemma 3 4B IT vs Command R7B ArabicCohere
- Llama-3.2-1B vs Ministral 3BMistral AI · ECI 118.0
- Llama-3.2-1B vs Command R7BCohere
- Llama-3.2-1B vs Nova MicroAmazon
