Model comparison

GPT-4 vs Granite 3.0 2b Instruct

Granite 3.0 2b Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 30.8 to 29.1 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 13 shared benchmarks.

GPT-4 OpenAI

29.1

Rank #316 Confirmed

Granite 3.0 2b Instruct IBM

30.8

Rank #286 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 13 benchmarks with published results for both. GPT-4 scores higher in 5 categories and Granite 3.0 2b Instruct in 3 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where Granite 3.0 2b Instruct leads 32.2 to 10.8.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is BigCodeBench Instruct: 46% for GPT-4 and 20.5% for Granite 3.0 2b Instruct.
  • Granite 3.0 2b Instruct has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

GPT-4 and Granite 3.0 2b Instruct specifications
GPT-4Granite 3.0 2b Instruct
ProviderOpenAIIBM
Noometry Index29.130.8
Released2023-03-14—
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window8K—
Max output8K—
Input $ / M tokens$30—
Output $ / M tokens$60—
Results tracked3813

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

Category by category

Coding GPT-4 leads

GPT-4: 31.6 (#283), Granite 3.0 2b Instruct: 28.3 (#316)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-4Granite 3.0 2b Instruct
BigCodeBench Instruct46%20.5%
LMArena Coding12541090
WeirdML12.4%—
BigCodeBench Complete57.2%—
HumanEval+79.3%—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

GPT-4: —, Granite 3.0 2b Instruct: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-4Granite 3.0 2b Instruct
METR Time Horizons36.1%—

Reasoning Granite 3.0 2b Instruct leads

GPT-4: 17.8 (#289), Granite 3.0 2b Instruct: 20.5 (#235)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-4Granite 3.0 2b Instruct
LMArena Hard Prompts12411073
Chess Puzzles4%—
Mystery Game Puzzles12%—
DTBench62.7%—
LMCA17.1%—
BIG-Bench Hard75.1%—
Epoch Capabilities Index125.89—
ForecastBench57.8—
HellaSwag95.3%—
WinoGrande87.5%—

Math Granite 3.0 2b Instruct leads

GPT-4: 10.8 (#309), Granite 3.0 2b Instruct: 32.2 (#217)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-4Granite 3.0 2b Instruct
LMArena Math12691117
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-20251.1%—
MATH Level 523%—
GSM8K92%—

Knowledge Granite 3.0 2b Instruct leads

GPT-4: 18.4 (#282), Granite 3.0 2b Instruct: 29.0 (#241)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-4Granite 3.0 2b Instruct
LMArena Expert12111064
GPQA Diamond35.7%—
MMLU86.4%—
TriviaQA84.8%—

Multilingual GPT-4 leads

GPT-4: 40.6 (#215), Granite 3.0 2b Instruct: 27.0 (#278)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-4Granite 3.0 2b Instruct
LMArena Non-English12461033
LMArena Chinese12421070
LMArena Russian12511045
LMArena French1283—
LMArena German1251—
LMArena Japanese1209—
LMArena Korean1184—
LMArena Spanish1261—

Instruction Following GPT-4 leads

GPT-4: 65.3 (#222), Granite 3.0 2b Instruct: 53.9 (#284)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-4Granite 3.0 2b Instruct
LMArena Instruction Following12411056

Long Context GPT-4 leads

GPT-4: 37.7 (#212), Granite 3.0 2b Instruct: 32.5 (#268)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-4Granite 3.0 2b Instruct
LMArena Longer Query12441070

Writing & Preference GPT-4 leads

GPT-4: 34.9 (#268), Granite 3.0 2b Instruct: 29.6 (#292)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-4Granite 3.0 2b Instruct
LMArena Text12631080
LMArena Creative Writing12441046
LMArena Multi-Turn12571053
EQ-Bench Creative Writing752—

Frequently asked questions

Is GPT-4 better than Granite 3.0 2b Instruct?

Granite 3.0 2b Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 30.8 to 29.1 on the Noometry Index.

Is GPT-4 or Granite 3.0 2b Instruct better for coding?

GPT-4 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 31.6 versus 28.3 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do GPT-4 and Granite 3.0 2b Instruct share?

13 benchmarks have published results for both models. GPT-4 has 38 scored results on Noometry and Granite 3.0 2b Instruct has 13.

Related comparisons

Go deeper