Model comparison
Claude 2 vs Llama 3.2 3B
Llama 3.2 3B is the stronger model overall, scoring 28.9 to 25.0 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.
MetaSummary
- The widest gap is in math, where Llama 3.2 3B leads 32.4 to 9.3.
- Llama 3.2 3B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Claude 2 | Llama 3.2 3B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | Meta |
| Noometry Index | 25.0 | 28.9 |
| Released | 2023-07-11 | 2024-09-24 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | — | 131K |
| Max output | — | 118K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.05 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $0.33 |
| Results tracked | 8 | 18 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Not comparable
Claude 2: —, Llama 3.2 3B: 27.6 (#319)
| Benchmark | Claude 2 | Llama 3.2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 23.4% |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1098 |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 28.3% |
| HumanEval+ | 61.6% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Claude 2: —, Llama 3.2 3B: 20.1 (#143)
| Benchmark | Claude 2 | Llama 3.2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 21.9% |
| BALROG | — | 10.1% |
Reasoning Too close to call
Claude 2: 21.7 (#216), Llama 3.2 3B: 21.0 (#228)
| Benchmark | Claude 2 | Llama 3.2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1095 |
| DTBench | 51.9% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 120.13 | — |
Math Llama 3.2 3B leads
Claude 2: 9.3 (#320), Llama 3.2 3B: 32.4 (#214)
| Benchmark | Claude 2 | Llama 3.2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 2.5% | — |
| LMArena Math | — | 1126 |
| MATH Level 5 | 11.7% | — |
Knowledge Llama 3.2 3B leads
Claude 2: 16.9 (#287), Llama 3.2 3B: 29.7 (#235)
| Benchmark | Claude 2 | Llama 3.2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 34.7% | — |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1090 |
| MMLU | 78.5% | — |
| TriviaQA | 87.5% | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
Claude 2: —, Llama 3.2 3B: 26.2 (#281)
| Benchmark | Claude 2 | Llama 3.2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1019 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1017 |
| LMArena German | — | 1056 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 949 |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Claude 2: —, Llama 3.2 3B: 56.0 (#275)
| Benchmark | Claude 2 | Llama 3.2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1089 |
Long Context Not comparable
Claude 2: —, Llama 3.2 3B: 33.4 (#261)
| Benchmark | Claude 2 | Llama 3.2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1100 |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Claude 2: —, Llama 3.2 3B: 24.7 (#307)
| Benchmark | Claude 2 | Llama 3.2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1110 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1094 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 595 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1105 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Claude 2 better than Llama 3.2 3B?
Llama 3.2 3B is the stronger model overall, scoring 28.9 to 25.0 on the Noometry Index.
How many benchmarks do Claude 2 and Llama 3.2 3B share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude 2 has 8 scored results on Noometry and Llama 3.2 3B has 18.