Model comparison

Gemma 1.1 2b IT vs Granite 3.1 8b Instruct

Granite 3.1 8b Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 31.8 to 28.8 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 12 shared benchmarks.

Gemma 1.1 2b IT Google

28.8

Rank #313 Confirmed

Granite 3.1 8b Instruct IBM

31.8

Rank #256 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 1.1 2b IT scores higher in 0 categories and Granite 3.1 8b Instruct in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Granite 3.1 8b Instruct leads 35.7 to 25.3.

Side by side

Gemma 1.1 2b IT and Granite 3.1 8b Instruct specifications
Gemma 1.1 2b ITGranite 3.1 8b Instruct
ProviderGoogleIBM
Noometry Index28.831.8
Released——
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window——
Max output——
Input $ / M tokens——
Output $ / M tokens——
Results tracked1613

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

Category by category

Coding Granite 3.1 8b Instruct leads

Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 29.6 (#294), Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 33.9 (#232)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 1.1 2b ITGranite 3.1 8b Instruct
LMArena Coding10341186
HumanEval+17.7%—
MBPP+23.3%—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Gemma 1.1 2b IT: —, Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 23.9 (#113)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 1.1 2b ITGranite 3.1 8b Instruct
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard—27.1%

Reasoning Granite 3.1 8b Instruct leads

Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 18.2 (#268), Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 21.2 (#204)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 1.1 2b ITGranite 3.1 8b Instruct
LMArena Hard Prompts10051146

Math Granite 3.1 8b Instruct leads

Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 28.3 (#230), Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 30.4 (#210)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 1.1 2b ITGranite 3.1 8b Instruct
LMArena Math10471152

Knowledge Granite 3.1 8b Instruct leads

Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 26.0 (#255), Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 30.6 (#218)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 1.1 2b ITGranite 3.1 8b Instruct
LMArena Expert9701142

Multilingual Granite 3.1 8b Instruct leads

Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 24.7 (#284), Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 31.1 (#255)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 1.1 2b ITGranite 3.1 8b Instruct
LMArena Non-English9881099
LMArena Chinese10111145
LMArena Russian9901092
LMArena German944—
LMArena Korean899—

Instruction Following Granite 3.1 8b Instruct leads

Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 50.1 (#294), Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 58.9 (#254)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 1.1 2b ITGranite 3.1 8b Instruct
LMArena Instruction Following9921131

Long Context Granite 3.1 8b Instruct leads

Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 30.5 (#281), Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 35.2 (#236)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 1.1 2b ITGranite 3.1 8b Instruct
LMArena Longer Query10031162

Writing & Preference Granite 3.1 8b Instruct leads

Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 25.3 (#301), Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 35.7 (#261)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 1.1 2b ITGranite 3.1 8b Instruct
LMArena Text10221150
LMArena Creative Writing9981129
LMArena Multi-Turn9581108

Frequently asked questions

Is Gemma 1.1 2b IT better than Granite 3.1 8b Instruct?

Granite 3.1 8b Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 31.8 to 28.8 on the Noometry Index.

Is Gemma 1.1 2b IT or Granite 3.1 8b Instruct better for coding?

Granite 3.1 8b Instruct scores higher on coding benchmarks: 33.9 versus 29.6 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Gemma 1.1 2b IT and Granite 3.1 8b Instruct share?

12 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 1.1 2b IT has 16 scored results on Noometry and Granite 3.1 8b Instruct has 13.

Related comparisons

Go deeper