Model comparison
GPT-5.5 Pro vs Llama 3.2 3B
GPT-5.5 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 64.3 to 28.9 on the Noometry Index. Llama 3.2 3B costs 563× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GPT-5.5 Pro's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.
MetaSummary
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where GPT-5.5 Pro leads 73.3 to 21.0.
- Llama 3.2 3B is cheaper at $0.05 / $0.33 per million input/output tokens, against $30 / $180 for GPT-5.5 Pro.
- GPT-5.5 Pro accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 131K.
- Llama 3.2 3B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| GPT-5.5 Pro | Llama 3.2 3B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenAI | Meta |
| Noometry Index | 64.3 | 28.9 |
| Released | 2026-04-23 | 2024-09-24 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 1.05M | 131K |
| Max output | 128K | 118K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $30 | $0.05 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $180 | $0.33 |
| Results tracked | 14 | 18 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Not comparable
GPT-5.5 Pro: —, Llama 3.2 3B: 27.6 (#319)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.5 Pro | Llama 3.2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 23.4% |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1098 |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 28.3% |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
GPT-5.5 Pro: —, Llama 3.2 3B: 20.1 (#143)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.5 Pro | Llama 3.2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 21.9% |
| BALROG | — | 10.1% |
Reasoning GPT-5.5 Pro leads
GPT-5.5 Pro: 73.3 (#10), Llama 3.2 3B: 21.0 (#228)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.5 Pro | Llama 3.2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| ARC-AGI-2 | 84.6% | — |
| SimpleBench | 76.9% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 96.5% | — |
| CritPt | 30.6% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 64% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1095 |
| DTBench | 96% | — |
| LMCA | 53.9% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 162.07 | — |
Math GPT-5.5 Pro leads
GPT-5.5 Pro: 84.0 (#10), Llama 3.2 3B: 32.4 (#214)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.5 Pro | Llama 3.2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 87.7% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 78% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 100% | — |
| LMArena Math | — | 1126 |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 52.4% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 39.6% | — |
Knowledge GPT-5.5 Pro leads
GPT-5.5 Pro: 64.1 (#19), Llama 3.2 3B: 29.7 (#235)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.5 Pro | Llama 3.2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 93.9% | — |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1090 |
Multilingual Not comparable
GPT-5.5 Pro: —, Llama 3.2 3B: 26.2 (#281)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.5 Pro | Llama 3.2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1019 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1017 |
| LMArena German | — | 1056 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 949 |
Instruction Following Not comparable
GPT-5.5 Pro: —, Llama 3.2 3B: 56.0 (#275)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.5 Pro | Llama 3.2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1089 |
Long Context Not comparable
GPT-5.5 Pro: —, Llama 3.2 3B: 33.4 (#261)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.5 Pro | Llama 3.2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1100 |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
GPT-5.5 Pro: —, Llama 3.2 3B: 24.7 (#307)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.5 Pro | Llama 3.2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1110 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1094 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 595 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1105 |
Frequently asked questions
Is GPT-5.5 Pro better than Llama 3.2 3B?
GPT-5.5 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 64.3 to 28.9 on the Noometry Index. Llama 3.2 3B costs 563× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GPT-5.5 Pro's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, GPT-5.5 Pro or Llama 3.2 3B?
Llama 3.2 3B is cheaper. It lists at $0.05 per million input tokens and $0.33 per million output tokens; GPT-5.5 Pro lists at $30 and $180.
Which has the bigger context window?
GPT-5.5 Pro does, with 1.05M tokens against 131K.
How many benchmarks do GPT-5.5 Pro and Llama 3.2 3B share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. GPT-5.5 Pro has 14 scored results on Noometry and Llama 3.2 3B has 18.