Model comparison

GPT-5.1 vs Llama 3.2 90B

GPT-5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 48.8 to 27.1 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 5 shared benchmarks.

GPT-5.1 OpenAI

48.8

Rank #47 Confirmed

Llama 3.2 90B Meta

27.1

Rank #326 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 5 benchmarks with published results for both. GPT-5.1 scores higher in 5 categories and Llama 3.2 90B in 0 categories; 5 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where GPT-5.1 leads 50.3 to 10.4.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 88.6% for GPT-5.1 and 2.6% for Llama 3.2 90B.
  • Llama 3.2 90B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

GPT-5.1 and Llama 3.2 90B specifications
GPT-5.1Llama 3.2 90B
ProviderOpenAIMeta
Noometry Index48.827.1
Released2025-11-132024-09-24
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window400K—
Max output128K—
Input $ / M tokens$1.25—
Output $ / M tokens$10—
Results tracked639

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

Category by category

Coding Not comparable

GPT-5.1: 46.9 (#59), Llama 3.2 90B: —

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.1Llama 3.2 90B
SWE-bench Verified68%—
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)66%—
LMArena WebDev1395—
SciCode43.3%—
GSO13.7%—
WeirdML60.8%—
LiveBench Coding72.5%—
LMArena Coding1454—
ALE-Bench1,192—

Agentic & Tool Use GPT-5.1 leads

GPT-5.1: 32.5 (#55), Llama 3.2 90B: 29.7 (#73)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.1Llama 3.2 90B
Terminal-Bench47.6%—
DeepResearch Bench42.8%—
BALROG—27.3%
LMArena Search1199—
Vending-Bench 21,473—

Reasoning GPT-5.1 leads

GPT-5.1: 39.9 (#50), Llama 3.2 90B: 20.9 (#207)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.1Llama 3.2 90B
EnigmaEval11.2%0.4%
Epoch Capabilities Index149.66125.5
ARC-AGI-217.6%—
SimpleBench53.2%—
ARC-AGI-172.8%—
CritPt4.9%—
Chess Puzzles32%—
LiveBench Reasoning95.8%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1457—
Mystery Game Puzzles19%—
DTBench90.1%—
LiveBench Data Analysis72.1%—
LMCA43.9%—
ForecastBench58.1—
LiveBench78.8%—

Math GPT-5.1 leads

GPT-5.1: 50.3 (#45), Llama 3.2 90B: 10.4 (#302)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.1Llama 3.2 90B
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202588.6%2.6%
Omni-MATH46.4%—
LiveBench Math94.5%—
LMArena Math1446—
MATH Level 5—39.4%
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)31%—
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)12.5%—

Knowledge GPT-5.1 leads

GPT-5.1: 50.5 (#65), Llama 3.2 90B: 21.7 (#269)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.1Llama 3.2 90B
GPQA Diamond87.6%41%
Humanity's Last Exam23.7%—
SimpleQA Verified48%—
MMLU-Pro57.9%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate10.9%—
GPQA (HELM)44.2%—
LMArena Expert1470—
MMLU—80.3%

Multimodal GPT-5.1 leads

GPT-5.1: 44.0 (#17), Llama 3.2 90B: 24.9 (#119)

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.1Llama 3.2 90B
LMArena Vision12501000
GeoBench—52%
VPCT58.7%—
LMArena Document1403—

Multilingual Not comparable

GPT-5.1: 54.0 (#51), Llama 3.2 90B: —

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.1Llama 3.2 90B
LMArena Non-English1431—
LMArena Chinese1495—
LMArena French1451—
LMArena German1439—
LMArena Japanese1453—
LMArena Korean1401—
LMArena Russian1435—
LMArena Spanish1430—

Instruction Following Not comparable

GPT-5.1: 84.0 (#1), Llama 3.2 90B: —

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.1Llama 3.2 90B
LiveBench Instruction Following93.3%—
IFEval93.5%—
LMArena Instruction Following1442—

Long Context Not comparable

GPT-5.1: 47.6 (#14), Llama 3.2 90B: —

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.1Llama 3.2 90B
CL-bench23.7%—
CL-bench Life17.3%—
LMArena Longer Query1448—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

GPT-5.1: 64.7 (#53), Llama 3.2 90B: —

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.1Llama 3.2 90B
LMArena Text1443—
LMArena Creative Writing1427—
WildBench86.3%—
LMArena Multi-Turn1449—
LiveBench Language80.2%—

Frequently asked questions

Is GPT-5.1 better than Llama 3.2 90B?

GPT-5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 48.8 to 27.1 on the Noometry Index.

How many benchmarks do GPT-5.1 and Llama 3.2 90B share?

5 benchmarks have published results for both models. GPT-5.1 has 63 scored results on Noometry and Llama 3.2 90B has 9.

Related comparisons

Go deeper