Noometry

Model comparison

GPT-4.1 nano vs Llama 2-7B

GPT-4.1 nano and Llama 2-7B score almost the same on the Noometry Index (27.7 vs 28.6), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.

Last verified . 14 shared benchmarks.

GPT-4.1 nano OpenAI

27.7

Rank #322 Confirmed

Llama 2-7B Meta

28.6

Rank #315 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 14 benchmarks with published results for both. GPT-4.1 nano scores higher in 3 categories and Llama 2-7B in 5 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in multilingual, where GPT-4.1 nano leads 41.8 to 23.9.
  • Llama 2-7B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

GPT-4.1 nanoLlama 2-7B
ProviderOpenAIMeta
Noometry Index27.728.6
Released2025-04-142023-07-18
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1.05M—
Max output33K—
Input $ / M tokens$0.10—
Output $ / M tokens$0.40—
Results tracked3829

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

Category by category

Coding Llama 2-7B leads

GPT-4.1 nano: 23.8 (#325), Llama 2-7B: 28.7 (#302)

BenchmarkGPT-4.1 nanoLlama 2-7B
LMArena Coding13061002
Aider Polyglot8.9%—
SciCode25.9%—
WeirdML19%—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

GPT-4.1 nano: 26.3 (#98), Llama 2-7B: —

BenchmarkGPT-4.1 nanoLlama 2-7B
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard33%—

Reasoning Llama 2-7B leads

GPT-4.1 nano: 8.6 (#344), Llama 2-7B: 15.1 (#309)

BenchmarkGPT-4.1 nanoLlama 2-7B
LMArena Hard Prompts12861009
Epoch Capabilities Index129.6298.54
ARC-AGI-20%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark33.3%—
ARC-AGI-10%—
CritPt0%—
Chess Puzzles—0%
DTBench52.5%—
LMCA5.5%—
BIG-Bench Hard—39.2%
HellaSwag—77.2%
LAMBADA—73.3%
PIQA—78.8%
WinoGrande—69.2%

Math Llama 2-7B leads

GPT-4.1 nano: 25.5 (#246), Llama 2-7B: 28.2 (#231)

BenchmarkGPT-4.1 nanoLlama 2-7B
LMArena Math12741042
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202528.9%—
Omni-MATH36.7%—
MATH Level 570%—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)1%—
GSM8K—16.7%

Knowledge Llama 2-7B leads

GPT-4.1 nano: 21.8 (#268), Llama 2-7B: 27.7 (#243)

BenchmarkGPT-4.1 nanoLlama 2-7B
LMArena Expert12721036
GPQA Diamond48.9%—
SimpleQA Verified6%—
MMLU-Pro55%—
GPQA (HELM)50.7%—
ARC (AI2) Challenge—45.9%
BoolQ—77.9%
MMLU—45.8%
OpenBookQA—58.6%
TriviaQA—73.7%

Multimodal Not comparable

GPT-4.1 nano: 28.6 (#108), Llama 2-7B: —

BenchmarkGPT-4.1 nanoLlama 2-7B
LMArena Vision1063—
ScienceQA—43.1%

Multilingual GPT-4.1 nano leads

GPT-4.1 nano: 41.8 (#200), Llama 2-7B: 23.9 (#288)

BenchmarkGPT-4.1 nanoLlama 2-7B
LMArena Non-English1260973
LMArena Chinese1270973
LMArena German1288978
LMArena Russian1261995
LMArena French—969
LMArena Japanese1199—
LMArena Spanish—1007

Instruction Following GPT-4.1 nano leads

GPT-4.1 nano: 68.0 (#188), Llama 2-7B: 51.0 (#293)

BenchmarkGPT-4.1 nanoLlama 2-7B
LMArena Instruction Following12671006
IFEval84.3%—

Long Context Llama 2-7B leads

GPT-4.1 nano: 23.7 (#291), Llama 2-7B: 30.4 (#282)

BenchmarkGPT-4.1 nanoLlama 2-7B
LMArena Longer Query1283999
Fiction.LiveBench25%—

Writing & Preference GPT-4.1 nano leads

GPT-4.1 nano: 40.7 (#238), Llama 2-7B: 28.1 (#293)

BenchmarkGPT-4.1 nanoLlama 2-7B
LMArena Text12851053
LMArena Creative Writing12601033
LMArena Multi-Turn12771029
EQ-Bench Creative Writing946—
WildBench81.2%—

Frequently asked questions

Is GPT-4.1 nano better than Llama 2-7B?

GPT-4.1 nano and Llama 2-7B score almost the same on the Noometry Index (27.7 vs 28.6), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.

Is GPT-4.1 nano or Llama 2-7B better for coding?

Llama 2-7B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 28.7 versus 23.8 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do GPT-4.1 nano and Llama 2-7B share?

14 benchmarks have published results for both models. GPT-4.1 nano has 38 scored results on Noometry and Llama 2-7B has 29.

Related comparisons

Go deeper