Model comparison
Dolly 2.0-12b vs Granite 3.1 2b Instruct
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 33.2 to 25.5 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 9 shared benchmarks.
DatabricksSummary
- They share 9 benchmarks with published results for both. Dolly 2.0-12b scores higher in 0 categories and Granite 3.1 2b Instruct in 6 categories; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in instruction following, where Granite 3.1 2b Instruct leads 57.7 to 38.7.
Side by side
| Dolly 2.0-12b | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Databricks | IBM |
| Noometry Index | 25.5 | 33.2 |
| Released | 2023-04-11 | — |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | — | — |
| Max output | — | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Results tracked | 17 | 12 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Granite 3.1 2b Instruct leads
Dolly 2.0-12b: 23.4 (#332), Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 33.4 (#257)
| Benchmark | Dolly 2.0-12b | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 776 | 1149 |
Reasoning Granite 3.1 2b Instruct leads
Dolly 2.0-12b: 15.3 (#316), Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 22.0 (#209)
| Benchmark | Dolly 2.0-12b | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 804 | 1138 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 89.67 | — |
| HellaSwag | 70.8% | — |
| PIQA | 75.4% | — |
| WinoGrande | 61.8% | — |
Math Granite 3.1 2b Instruct leads
Dolly 2.0-12b: 27.3 (#251), Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 33.1 (#206)
| Benchmark | Dolly 2.0-12b | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 871 | 1159 |
Knowledge Not comparable
Dolly 2.0-12b: —, Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 30.8 (#224)
| Benchmark | Dolly 2.0-12b | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | — | 1131 |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | 39.6% | — |
| BoolQ | 56.3% | — |
| MMLU | 26.2% | — |
| OpenBookQA | 39.2% | — |
Multilingual Granite 3.1 2b Instruct leads
Dolly 2.0-12b: 17.4 (#296), Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 29.1 (#269)
| Benchmark | Dolly 2.0-12b | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 836 | 1068 |
| LMArena Chinese | 836 | 1139 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1063 |
Instruction Following Granite 3.1 2b Instruct leads
Dolly 2.0-12b: 38.7 (#304), Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 57.7 (#264)
| Benchmark | Dolly 2.0-12b | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 814 | 1116 |
Long Context Not comparable
Dolly 2.0-12b: —, Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 35.0 (#244)
| Benchmark | Dolly 2.0-12b | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1155 |
Writing & Preference Granite 3.1 2b Instruct leads
Dolly 2.0-12b: 15.2 (#311), Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 34.1 (#274)
| Benchmark | Dolly 2.0-12b | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 851 | 1127 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 864 | 1116 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 740 | 1099 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Dolly 2.0-12b better than Granite 3.1 2b Instruct?
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 33.2 to 25.5 on the Noometry Index.
Is Dolly 2.0-12b or Granite 3.1 2b Instruct better for coding?
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct scores higher on coding benchmarks: 33.4 versus 23.4 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Dolly 2.0-12b and Granite 3.1 2b Instruct share?
9 benchmarks have published results for both models. Dolly 2.0-12b has 17 scored results on Noometry and Granite 3.1 2b Instruct has 12.