Noometry

Model comparison

Claude 3 Sonnet vs Granite 3.1 2b Instruct

Granite 3.1 2b Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 33.2 to 29.0 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 12 shared benchmarks.

Claude 3 Sonnet Anthropic

29.0

Rank #319 Confirmed

Granite 3.1 2b Instruct IBM

33.2

Rank #247 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude 3 Sonnet scores higher in 4 categories and Granite 3.1 2b Instruct in 4 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where Granite 3.1 2b Instruct leads 33.1 to 10.7.
  • Granite 3.1 2b Instruct has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Claude 3 SonnetGranite 3.1 2b Instruct
ProviderAnthropicIBM
Noometry Index29.033.2
Released2024-02-29—
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window——
Max output——
Input $ / M tokens——
Output $ / M tokens——
Results tracked3012

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding Granite 3.1 2b Instruct leads

Claude 3 Sonnet: 29.6 (#302), Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 33.4 (#257)

BenchmarkClaude 3 SonnetGranite 3.1 2b Instruct
LMArena Coding12231149
WeirdML10.2%—
BigCodeBench Instruct42.7%—
BigCodeBench Complete53.8%—
HumanEval+64%—
MBPP+69.3%—

Reasoning Granite 3.1 2b Instruct leads

Claude 3 Sonnet: 20.5 (#237), Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 22.0 (#209)

BenchmarkClaude 3 SonnetGranite 3.1 2b Instruct
LMArena Hard Prompts11971138
DTBench53.6%—
Epoch Capabilities Index120.7—
WinoGrande75.1%—

Math Granite 3.1 2b Instruct leads

Claude 3 Sonnet: 10.7 (#310), Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 33.1 (#206)

BenchmarkClaude 3 SonnetGranite 3.1 2b Instruct
LMArena Math12131159
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-20252.5%—
MATH Level 518.2%—

Knowledge Granite 3.1 2b Instruct leads

Claude 3 Sonnet: 21.1 (#276), Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 30.8 (#224)

BenchmarkClaude 3 SonnetGranite 3.1 2b Instruct
LMArena Expert11731131
GPQA Diamond40.6%—
MMLU75.9%—

Multimodal Not comparable

Claude 3 Sonnet: 25.2 (#125), Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: —

BenchmarkClaude 3 SonnetGranite 3.1 2b Instruct
LMArena Vision984—

Multilingual Claude 3 Sonnet leads

Claude 3 Sonnet: 37.8 (#234), Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 29.1 (#269)

BenchmarkClaude 3 SonnetGranite 3.1 2b Instruct
LMArena Non-English12051068
LMArena Chinese11891139
LMArena Russian12271063
LMArena French1229—
LMArena German1204—
LMArena Japanese1131—
LMArena Korean1128—
LMArena Spanish1204—

Instruction Following Claude 3 Sonnet leads

Claude 3 Sonnet: 62.8 (#235), Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 57.7 (#264)

BenchmarkClaude 3 SonnetGranite 3.1 2b Instruct
LMArena Instruction Following11991116

Long Context Claude 3 Sonnet leads

Claude 3 Sonnet: 36.7 (#228), Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 35.0 (#244)

BenchmarkClaude 3 SonnetGranite 3.1 2b Instruct
LMArena Longer Query12111155

Writing & Preference Claude 3 Sonnet leads

Claude 3 Sonnet: 42.1 (#238), Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 34.1 (#274)

BenchmarkClaude 3 SonnetGranite 3.1 2b Instruct
LMArena Text12181127
LMArena Creative Writing11861116
LMArena Multi-Turn12271099

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude 3 Sonnet better than Granite 3.1 2b Instruct?

Granite 3.1 2b Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 33.2 to 29.0 on the Noometry Index.

Is Claude 3 Sonnet or Granite 3.1 2b Instruct better for coding?

Granite 3.1 2b Instruct scores higher on coding benchmarks: 33.4 versus 29.6 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Claude 3 Sonnet and Granite 3.1 2b Instruct share?

12 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude 3 Sonnet has 30 scored results on Noometry and Granite 3.1 2b Instruct has 12.

Related comparisons

Go deeper