Model comparison
Claude 2 vs Llama 3.1-405B
Llama 3.1-405B is the stronger model overall, scoring 30.7 to 25.0 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 7 shared benchmarks.
MetaSummary
- They share 7 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude 2 scores higher in 1 category and Llama 3.1-405B in 2 categories; 3 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Llama 3.1-405B leads 30.4 to 16.9.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is MATH Level 5: 11.7% for Claude 2 and 49.8% for Llama 3.1-405B.
- Llama 3.1-405B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Claude 2 | Llama 3.1-405B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | Meta |
| Noometry Index | 25.0 | 30.7 |
| Released | 2023-07-11 | 2024-07-23 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | — | — |
| Max output | — | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Results tracked | 8 | 42 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Not comparable
Claude 2: —, Llama 3.1-405B: 33.1 (#262)
| Benchmark | Claude 2 | Llama 3.1-405B |
|---|---|---|
| WeirdML | — | 21.4% |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1291 |
| HumanEval+ | 61.6% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Claude 2: —, Llama 3.1-405B: 21.0 (#140)
| Benchmark | Claude 2 | Llama 3.1-405B |
|---|---|---|
| TheAgentCompany | — | 7.4% |
| Cybench | — | 7.5% |
Reasoning Claude 2 leads
Claude 2: 21.7 (#216), Llama 3.1-405B: 16.8 (#300)
| Benchmark | Claude 2 | Llama 3.1-405B |
|---|---|---|
| DTBench | 51.9% | 61.4% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 120.13 | 128.75 |
| SimpleBench | — | 23% |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 45% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1269 |
| BIG-Bench Hard | — | 82.9% |
| ForecastBench | — | 59.9 |
| HellaSwag | — | 89.2% |
| PIQA | — | 85.9% |
| WinoGrande | — | 89.2% |
Math Llama 3.1-405B leads
Claude 2: 9.3 (#320), Llama 3.1-405B: 18.4 (#290)
| Benchmark | Claude 2 | Llama 3.1-405B |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 2.5% | 9.7% |
| MATH Level 5 | 11.7% | 49.8% |
| Omni-MATH | — | 24.9% |
| LMArena Math | — | 1281 |
Knowledge Llama 3.1-405B leads
Claude 2: 16.9 (#287), Llama 3.1-405B: 30.4 (#227)
| Benchmark | Claude 2 | Llama 3.1-405B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 34.7% | 50.9% |
| MMLU | 78.5% | 84.5% |
| TriviaQA | 87.5% | 82.7% |
| MMLU-Pro | — | 72.3% |
| Confabulations | — | 17.6% |
| GPQA (HELM) | — | 52.2% |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1243 |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | — | 95.3% |
Multilingual Not comparable
Claude 2: —, Llama 3.1-405B: 40.7 (#214)
| Benchmark | Claude 2 | Llama 3.1-405B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1248 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1242 |
| LMArena French | — | 1279 |
| LMArena German | — | 1252 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1208 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1184 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1265 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1260 |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Claude 2: —, Llama 3.1-405B: 65.9 (#214)
| Benchmark | Claude 2 | Llama 3.1-405B |
|---|---|---|
| IFEval | — | 81.1% |
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1259 |
Long Context Not comparable
Claude 2: —, Llama 3.1-405B: 38.4 (#197)
| Benchmark | Claude 2 | Llama 3.1-405B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1266 |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Claude 2: —, Llama 3.1-405B: 38.9 (#251)
| Benchmark | Claude 2 | Llama 3.1-405B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1284 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1262 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 870 |
| WildBench | — | 78.3% |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1297 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Claude 2 better than Llama 3.1-405B?
Llama 3.1-405B is the stronger model overall, scoring 30.7 to 25.0 on the Noometry Index.
How many benchmarks do Claude 2 and Llama 3.1-405B share?
7 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude 2 has 8 scored results on Noometry and Llama 3.1-405B has 42.