Model comparison
C4ai Aya Expanse 32b vs Llama 3.2 3B
C4ai Aya Expanse 32b is the stronger model overall, scoring 35.9 to 28.9 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 13 shared benchmarks.
Cohere
MetaSummary
- They share 13 benchmarks with published results for both. C4ai Aya Expanse 32b scores higher in 8 categories and Llama 3.2 3B in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where C4ai Aya Expanse 32b leads 42.2 to 24.7.
- Llama 3.2 3B accepts more context: 131K tokens versus 128K.
Side by side
| C4ai Aya Expanse 32b | Llama 3.2 3B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Cohere | Meta |
| Noometry Index | 35.9 | 28.9 |
| Released | 2024-10-24 | 2024-09-24 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 128K | 131K |
| Max output | 4K | 118K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.05 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $0.33 |
| Results tracked | 18 | 18 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding C4ai Aya Expanse 32b leads
C4ai Aya Expanse 32b: 34.8 (#231), Llama 3.2 3B: 27.6 (#319)
| Benchmark | C4ai Aya Expanse 32b | Llama 3.2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1197 | 1098 |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 23.4% |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 28.3% |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
C4ai Aya Expanse 32b: —, Llama 3.2 3B: 20.1 (#143)
| Benchmark | C4ai Aya Expanse 32b | Llama 3.2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 21.9% |
| BALROG | — | 10.1% |
Reasoning C4ai Aya Expanse 32b leads
C4ai Aya Expanse 32b: 23.3 (#180), Llama 3.2 3B: 21.0 (#228)
| Benchmark | C4ai Aya Expanse 32b | Llama 3.2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1193 | 1095 |
Math C4ai Aya Expanse 32b leads
C4ai Aya Expanse 32b: 34.0 (#197), Llama 3.2 3B: 32.4 (#214)
| Benchmark | C4ai Aya Expanse 32b | Llama 3.2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1200 | 1126 |
Knowledge C4ai Aya Expanse 32b leads
C4ai Aya Expanse 32b: 33.2 (#206), Llama 3.2 3B: 29.7 (#235)
| Benchmark | C4ai Aya Expanse 32b | Llama 3.2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1182 | 1090 |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 10.9% | — |
Multilingual C4ai Aya Expanse 32b leads
C4ai Aya Expanse 32b: 38.4 (#230), Llama 3.2 3B: 26.2 (#281)
| Benchmark | C4ai Aya Expanse 32b | Llama 3.2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1213 | 1019 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1211 | 1017 |
| LMArena German | 1199 | 1056 |
| LMArena Russian | 1227 | 949 |
| LMArena French | 1248 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1163 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1158 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1193 | — |
Instruction Following C4ai Aya Expanse 32b leads
C4ai Aya Expanse 32b: 62.6 (#237), Llama 3.2 3B: 56.0 (#275)
| Benchmark | C4ai Aya Expanse 32b | Llama 3.2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1196 | 1089 |
Long Context C4ai Aya Expanse 32b leads
C4ai Aya Expanse 32b: 37.2 (#220), Llama 3.2 3B: 33.4 (#261)
| Benchmark | C4ai Aya Expanse 32b | Llama 3.2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1228 | 1100 |
Writing & Preference C4ai Aya Expanse 32b leads
C4ai Aya Expanse 32b: 42.2 (#235), Llama 3.2 3B: 24.7 (#307)
| Benchmark | C4ai Aya Expanse 32b | Llama 3.2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1224 | 1110 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1200 | 1094 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1190 | 1105 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 595 |
Frequently asked questions
Is C4ai Aya Expanse 32b better than Llama 3.2 3B?
C4ai Aya Expanse 32b is the stronger model overall, scoring 35.9 to 28.9 on the Noometry Index.
Is C4ai Aya Expanse 32b or Llama 3.2 3B better for coding?
C4ai Aya Expanse 32b scores higher on coding benchmarks: 34.8 versus 27.6 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Llama 3.2 3B does, with 131K tokens against 128K.
How many benchmarks do C4ai Aya Expanse 32b and Llama 3.2 3B share?
13 benchmarks have published results for both models. C4ai Aya Expanse 32b has 18 scored results on Noometry and Llama 3.2 3B has 18.