LLM ReferenceLLM Reference

Gemini 1.5 Flash vs Llama Guard 3 1B

Gemini 1.5 Flash (2024) and Llama Guard 3 1B (2024) are general-purpose language models from Google DeepMind and AI at Meta. Gemini 1.5 Flash ships a 1M-token context window, while Llama Guard 3 1B ships a not-yet-sourced context window. On pricing, Gemini 1.5 Flash costs $0.07/1M input tokens versus $0.1/1M for the alternative. This comparison covers specs, pricing, capabilities, benchmarks, provider availability, and production fit.

Llama Guard 3 1B is safer overall; choose Gemini 1.5 Flash when provider fit matters.

Specs

Specification
Released2024-05-142024-09-25
Context window1M—
Parameters—1B
Architecturedecoder onlydecoder only
LicenseUnknownOpen Source
Knowledge cutoff--

Pricing and availability

Pricing attributeGemini 1.5 FlashLlama Guard 3 1B
Input price$0.07/1M tokens$0.1/1M tokens
Output price$0.3/1M tokens$0.1/1M tokens
Providers
GCP Vertex AIGoogle AI Studio
Fireworks AI

Capabilities

CapabilityGemini 1.5 FlashLlama Guard 3 1B
VisionNoNo
MultimodalNoNo
ReasoningNoNo
Function callingNoNo
Tool useNoNo
Structured outputsYesNo
Code executionNoNo

Benchmarks

No shared benchmark rows are currently sourced for this pair.

Deep dive

The capability footprint differs most on structured outputs: Gemini 1.5 Flash. Both models share the core language-model surface, so the practical split is not just feature count. Use those differences to decide whether the page is about raw model quality, agentic coding support, multimodal ingestion, or predictable structured API behavior.

For cost, Gemini 1.5 Flash lists $0.07/1M input and $0.3/1M output tokens, while Llama Guard 3 1B lists $0.1/1M input and $0.1/1M output tokens on the cheapest tracked provider. A 70/30 input-output blend puts Llama Guard 3 1B lower by about $0.04 per million blended tokens. Availability is 2 providers versus 1, so concentration risk also matters.

Choose Gemini 1.5 Flash when provider fit, lower input-token cost, and broader provider choice are central to the workload. Choose Llama Guard 3 1B when provider fit are more important. For production, rerun your own prompts through the exact provider, region, and tool stack you plan to ship. This keeps the decision grounded in measurable tradeoffs instead of brand-level assumptions. It also helps separate model capability from provider packaging, which can change cost and latency.

FAQ

Which is cheaper, Gemini 1.5 Flash or Llama Guard 3 1B?

Gemini 1.5 Flash is cheaper on tracked token pricing. Gemini 1.5 Flash costs $0.07/1M input and $0.3/1M output tokens. Llama Guard 3 1B costs $0.1/1M input and $0.1/1M output tokens. Provider discounts or batch pricing can still change the final bill.

Is Gemini 1.5 Flash or Llama Guard 3 1B open source?

Gemini 1.5 Flash is listed under Unknown. Llama Guard 3 1B is listed under Open Source. License labels affect whether you can self-host, redistribute weights, or rely only on hosted APIs, so confirm the upstream license before deployment.

Which is better for structured outputs, Gemini 1.5 Flash or Llama Guard 3 1B?

Gemini 1.5 Flash has the clearer documented structured outputs signal in this comparison. If structured outputs is mission-critical, validate it against the provider endpoint because model-level support and API-level exposure can differ.

Where can I run Gemini 1.5 Flash and Llama Guard 3 1B?

Gemini 1.5 Flash is available on GCP Vertex AI and Google AI Studio. Llama Guard 3 1B is available on Fireworks AI. Provider coverage can affect latency, region availability, compliance posture, and fallback options.

When should I pick Gemini 1.5 Flash over Llama Guard 3 1B?

Llama Guard 3 1B is safer overall; choose Gemini 1.5 Flash when provider fit matters. If your workload also depends on provider fit, start with Gemini 1.5 Flash; if it depends on provider fit, run the same evaluation with Llama Guard 3 1B.

Continue comparing

Model pages
Labs and families
Related comparisons

Last reviewed: 2026-05-11. Data sourced from public model cards and provider documentation.