CompareLLM
CompareLLM.ai
Live
LeaderboardModelsCompareStacksBest ofGuidesNewsMethod
…
CompareLLM
CompareLLM.ai
Precision Benchmarks

Programmatic, dated AI model benchmarks, head-to-head comparisons, and Stack Engine presets.

Daily ingest · 06:00 UTC

Analytics & Benchmarks

  • AI Model Leaderboard
  • Head-to-Head Compare Hub
  • Models Directory
  • Stack Engine Presets
  • Frontier Models
  • Open Weights Catalog

Guides & Intent Lists

  • Best LLM Lists (2026)
  • Best Coding LLM
  • Best Cheap LLM
  • Fastest Low-Latency LLM
  • Claude vs GPT Benchmark
  • What is Elo?
  • Methodology Guides
  • News & Dispatches

Transparency & API

  • Evaluation Methodology
  • Benchmark Changelog
  • Public JSON API
  • llms.txt Specification
  • Privacy Policy
  • Sign In / Account

© 2026 CompareLLM. Public benchmark data aggregated from Arena Elo, LiveBench, SWE-bench & OpenRouter.

Every score has a dated snapshot.

  1. Home
  2. Comparisons
  3. Gemini 3.6 Pro vs Llama 3.3 70B

Pairwise benchmark snapshot · Aug 16, 2026

Gemini 3.6 Pro vs Llama 3.3 70B benchmark

This page compares Gemini 3.6 Pro (Google) and Llama 3.3 70B (Meta) using the latest snapshots we have as of Aug 16, 2026. On preference Elo, Gemini 3.6 Pro is ahead by 285 points (1,570 vs 1,285; seed-bootstrap (Aug 16, 2026)). On SWE-bench coding, Gemini 3.6 Pro resolves 74.6% versus 45.1% (seed-bootstrap (Aug 16, 2026)). Llama 3.3 70B streams faster (140 tok/s) while Llama 3.3 70B is the cheaper output token ($0.32/1M). Gemini 3.6 Pro has the larger context window (2M tokens). Every cell below is a dated snapshot from a named public source — we do not invent missing scores, and we do not run SWE-bench ourselves.

Quick answer

Gemini 3.6 Pro vs Llama 3.3 70B is a dated snapshot, not a lab score. Gemini 3.6 Pro leads preference Elo (1,570 vs 1,285). Gemini 3.6 Pro leads SWE-bench coding. Llama 3.3 70B is the cheaper output token. Elo is crowd preference, not an exam. Pick the column that matches the job.
Share Analysis:
WhatsAppTelegramX / PostLinkedInReddit

Google

Gemini 3.6 Pro

Current Google Pro-class multimodal model. Long context, strong coding, billed like the 3.x Pro tier.

Elo 1,570$5/1M out

Meta

Llama 3.3 70B

Previous Meta 70B open-weight workhorse.

Elo 1,285$0.32/1M out

Swap or Add Any Model to this Matchup

Instant pairwise benchmark recalculation across 400+ LLMs

Model A
Model B
Quick vs:vs Claude Opus 4.5vs Claude Opus 4.6vs Claude Sonnet 4.5vs Claude 3.7 Sonnet

Interactive Comparison Diagram

Matchup Breakdown

Tug-of-War Matchup Matrix

Category wins across intelligence, speed, and pricing efficiency.

Gemini 3.6 Pro (6)vsLlama 3.3 70B (4)
Gemini 3.6 Pro: 6W (60%)Overall: Gemini 3.6 ProLlama 3.3 70B: 4W (40%)
← Gemini 3.6 ProLlama 3.3 70B →
Gemini 3.6 Pro (5/5)

Intelligence & Reasoning

Preference Elo, Coding proficiency, SWE-bench & LiveBench accuracy

Preference Elo
1,570vs1,285
Coding Elo
1,566vs—
SWE-bench
74.6%vs45.1%
LiveBench
71.8%vs49.8%
GPQA Diamond
84.4%vs65.7%
Gemini 3.6 Pro: 5WLlama 3.3 70B: 0W
Llama 3.3 70B (2/2)

Speed & Latency

Generation throughput and time to first token responsiveness

Output speed
102 tok/svs140 tok/s
Time to first token
205 msvs160 ms
Gemini 3.6 Pro: 0WLlama 3.3 70B: 2W
Llama 3.3 70B (2/3)

Pricing & Capacity

Cost per million tokens and max context window length

Output price
$5/1Mvs$0.32/1M
Input price
$1.25/1Mvs$0.1/1M
Context window
2Mvs131k
Gemini 3.6 Pro: 1WLlama 3.3 70B: 2W
Capability Matchup Radar

Multi-Dimensional Capability Radar

Each spoke is a skill. Farther from the center is better (0–100th percentile). Tap any dot to inspect details.

Tap any node to inspect
Percentile 0–100
Dimensional AdvantageGemini 3.6 Pro 4/6
Preference Elo

Gemini 3.6 Pro

285 pts advantage

Throughput Speed

Llama 3.3 70B

38 tok/s faster

Price Efficiency

Llama 3.3 70B

$4.68/1M cheaper

Full Benchmark Score Matrix

—
Elo
High is better
+22%1,570
EloHigh is better
1,285
Code Elo
High is better
1,566
Code EloHigh is better
—
LiveBench
High is better
+44%71.8%
LiveBenchHigh is better
49.8%
SWE-bench
High is better
+65%74.6%
SWE-benchHigh is better
45.1%
GPQA
High is better
+28%84.4%
GPQAHigh is better
65.7%
TTFT
Low is better
205 ms
TTFTLow is better
160 ms+28%
Speed
High is better
102 tok/s
SpeedHigh is better
140 tok/s+37%
In $
Low is better
$1.25/1M
In $Low is better
$0.1/1M+1150%
Out $
Low is better
$5/1M
Out $Low is better
$0.32/1M+1462%
Context
High is better
+1426%2M
ContextHigh is better
131k
Interactive Simulator

Workload Cost & Savings Calculator

Simulate monthly production API costs based on published $/1M tokens.

Save up to 93% with Llama 3.3 70B
Monthly Volume50M tokens/mo
Quick Presets:
Token Ratio (In vs Out)70% In / 30% Out
RAG / Search (10% out)Coding / Chat (50% out)
Gemini 3.6 Pro$118.75 / mo
In: $43.75Out: $75.00
Llama 3.3 70B$8.30 / mo
In: $3.50Out: $4.80
Estimated Cost Delta

Llama 3.3 70B is estimated to save $110.45/month ($1,325/year).

Based on 50M tokens (30% gen)

Key Selection Recommendations

  • 1
    Gemini 3.6 Pro:Pick Gemini 3.6 Pro when repo-level coding accuracy is the constraint.
  • 2
    Llama 3.3 70B:Pick Llama 3.3 70B when you are optimizing output cost.
  • 3
    Llama 3.3 70B:Pick Llama 3.3 70B when time-to-first-token matters more than peak Elo.

Recommended Workload Routing

Repo / coding agentsGemini 3.6 Pro

Higher SWE-bench (74.6%).

High-volume chatLlama 3.3 70B

Lower output list price ($0.32/1M).

Voice / low-latency UILlama 3.3 70B

Lower TTFT (160 ms).

Long-document RAGGemini 3.6 Pro

Larger window (2M).

Screenshots / visionGemini 3.6 Pro

Gemini 3.6 Pro is the side marked multimodal in the catalog.

Target WorkloadRecommended PickEvaluation Rationale
Repo / coding agentsGemini 3.6 ProHigher SWE-bench (74.6%).
High-volume chatLlama 3.3 70BLower output list price ($0.32/1M).
Voice / low-latency UILlama 3.3 70BLower TTFT (160 ms).
Long-document RAGGemini 3.6 ProLarger window (2M).
Screenshots / visionGemini 3.6 ProGemini 3.6 Pro is the side marked multimodal in the catalog.

Related Editorial Dispatches & Benchmark Notes

View all news
compareAug 13, 2026

Gemini Flash vs Pro: when Flash is the whole product

3.7 Flash vs 3.6 Pro is the current Google volume-versus-upgrade pair.

compareJul 24, 2026

Claude vs Gemini: coding, Elo, and output price — not a brand mashup

Top Anthropic vs top Google. Usually Opus 5 vs 3.6 Pro. Two different invoices.

compareJul 16, 2026

Gemini vs GPT: long context versus the OpenAI flagship invoice

Hub remaps to top Google vs top OpenAI Elo. Usually 3.6 Pro vs Sol. Window vs price is the plot.

launchJul 15, 2026

Gemini 3.6 Pro: Google’s current Pro-class long-context row

2M context, Pro-class Elo and coding. Upgrade path from Flash is this page, not a vibe check.

Community Sentiment

Cast Your Matchup Vote

0 total votes

Community Discussions (0)

Sign in to cast your verified vote, bookmark models, and participate in benchmark discussions.Sign In to Post

No comments posted on this matchup yet. Be the first to share an evaluation note!

Share card

The real PNG is generated at /compare/gemini-3-6-pro-vs-llama-3-3-70b/opengraph-image for crawlers.

PNG

CompareLLM Matrix

Verified head-to-head card

LIVE
VS
Google

Gemini 3.6 Pro

Elo 1,570
LiveBench71.8%
SWE-bench74.6%
Speed102 tok/s
Output cost$5/1M
Meta

Llama 3.3 70B

Elo 1,285
LiveBench49.8%
SWE-bench45.1%
Speed140 tok/s
Output cost$0.32/1M

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is better overall, Gemini 3.6 Pro or Llama 3.3 70B?
Gemini 3.6 Pro has the higher preference Elo in our latest snapshot (1,570). “Better” still depends on coding, price, and latency — see the table.
Which is better at coding, Gemini 3.6 Pro or Llama 3.3 70B?
Gemini 3.6 Pro leads SWE-bench at 74.6% vs 45.1%. SWE-bench is one harness, not your repo.
Which is cheaper to run in production?
Llama 3.3 70B output tokens are $0.32/1M versus $5/1M. Input prices and retry rates still move the real bill.
Which is faster, Gemini 3.6 Pro or Llama 3.3 70B?
Llama 3.3 70B has the lower time-to-first-token (160 ms vs 205 ms). Tokens/sec is a separate column if you care about long completions.
Which has the larger context window?
Gemini 3.6 Pro accepts 2M tokens versus 131k.
Can I self-host either model?
Llama 3.3 70B is marked open-weights in our catalog. The other side is a closed API. Check the provider license before you ship weights.
Are these scores from CompareLLM’s own evals?
No. V1 aggregates public leaderboards (and optional first-party latency pings). Each cell names its source and date. Read /methodology.
What does preference Elo mean on this page?
Preference Elo is a crowd vote from LMArena / Arena. People see two hidden answers and pick the one they like more. The model that wins more often gets a higher Elo. That means people preferred it — not that it passed a school test. It is not SWE-bench, not accuracy, and not a number we invent. Gemini 3.6 Pro and Llama 3.3 70B Elo cells are dated snapshots from the named source — we do not compute Arena ourselves.

Related news

  • compare · Aug 13, 2026

    Gemini Flash vs Pro: when Flash is the whole product

  • compare · Jul 24, 2026

    Claude vs Gemini: coding, Elo, and output price — not a brand mashup

  • compare · Jul 16, 2026

    Gemini vs GPT: long context versus the OpenAI flagship invoice

  • launch · Jul 15, 2026

    Gemini 3.6 Pro: Google’s current Pro-class long-context row

Similar Head-to-Head Comparisons

All Gemini 3.6 Pro matchups →|All Llama 3.3 70B matchups →
Gemini 3.6 Pro vs Gemini 3 Pro (previous gemini-pro)Llama 3.3 70B vs Llama 3.1 70B (previous llama)Llama 3.3 70B vs Llama 4 Maverick (next llama)Gemini 3.7 Flash vs Gemini 3.6 ProGemini 3.6 Flash vs Gemini 3.6 ProGemini 3 Flash vs Gemini 3.6 Pro