Model comparison
GPT-5.6 Terra vs Llama 2-7B
GPT-5.6 Terra is the stronger model overall, scoring 59.1 to 28.6 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 17 shared benchmarks.
MetaSummary
- They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. GPT-5.6 Terra scores higher in 8 categories and Llama 2-7B in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where GPT-5.6 Terra leads 81.5 to 28.2.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is Chess Puzzles: 54% for GPT-5.6 Terra and 0% for Llama 2-7B.
- Llama 2-7B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| GPT-5.6 Terra | Llama 2-7B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenAI | Meta |
| Noometry Index | 59.1 | 28.6 |
| Released | 2026-07-09 | 2023-07-18 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 1.05M | — |
| Max output | 128K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $2 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $12 | — |
| Results tracked | 52 | 29 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding GPT-5.6 Terra leads
GPT-5.6 Terra: 57.1 (#16), Llama 2-7B: 28.7 (#302)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.6 Terra | Llama 2-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1484 | 1002 |
| DeepSWE | 69.6% | — |
| FrontierCode | 41.3% | — |
| CursorBench | 41.3% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1520 | — |
| SciCode | 55% | — |
| WeirdML | 78.3% | — |
| ALE-Bench | 1,951 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
GPT-5.6 Terra: 40.2 (#23), Llama 2-7B: —
| Benchmark | GPT-5.6 Terra | Llama 2-7B |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | 58.2% | — |
| BALROG | 53.2% | — |
| GDP.pdf | 24.7% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 7,343 | — |
Reasoning GPT-5.6 Terra leads
GPT-5.6 Terra: 60.6 (#19), Llama 2-7B: 15.1 (#309)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.6 Terra | Llama 2-7B |
|---|---|---|
| Chess Puzzles | 54% | 0% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1467 | 1009 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 159.31 | 98.54 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 83.9% | — |
| SimpleBench | 48.9% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 51.3% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 78.4% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 96.5% | — |
| CritPt | 30% | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 35% | — |
| DTBench | 93.3% | — |
| LMCA | 55% | — |
| Surface Evolver Bench | 83.8% | — |
| BIG-Bench Hard | — | 39.2% |
| HellaSwag | — | 77.2% |
| LAMBADA | — | 73.3% |
| PIQA | — | 78.8% |
| WinoGrande | — | 69.2% |
Math GPT-5.6 Terra leads
GPT-5.6 Terra: 81.5 (#10), Llama 2-7B: 28.2 (#231)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.6 Terra | Llama 2-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1463 | 1042 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 86% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 70.7% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 99.7% | — |
| ProofBench | 74% | — |
| GSM8K | — | 16.7% |
Knowledge GPT-5.6 Terra leads
GPT-5.6 Terra: 61.3 (#27), Llama 2-7B: 27.7 (#243)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.6 Terra | Llama 2-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1492 | 1036 |
| GPQA Diamond | 93.3% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | 43.2% | — |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | — | 45.9% |
| BoolQ | — | 77.9% |
| MMLU | — | 45.8% |
| OpenBookQA | — | 58.6% |
| TriviaQA | — | 73.7% |
Multimodal Not comparable
GPT-5.6 Terra: 47.5 (#10), Llama 2-7B: —
| Benchmark | GPT-5.6 Terra | Llama 2-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1271 | — |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | 30.8% | — |
| Furniture Assembly | 54.2% | — |
| LMArena Document | 1472 | — |
| ScienceQA | — | 43.1% |
Multilingual GPT-5.6 Terra leads
GPT-5.6 Terra: 54.5 (#42), Llama 2-7B: 23.9 (#288)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.6 Terra | Llama 2-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1439 | 973 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1514 | 973 |
| LMArena French | 1476 | 969 |
| LMArena German | 1462 | 978 |
| LMArena Russian | 1450 | 995 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1455 | 1007 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1446 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1420 | — |
Instruction Following GPT-5.6 Terra leads
GPT-5.6 Terra: 76.6 (#38), Llama 2-7B: 51.0 (#293)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.6 Terra | Llama 2-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1453 | 1006 |
Long Context GPT-5.6 Terra leads
GPT-5.6 Terra: 44.4 (#64), Llama 2-7B: 30.4 (#282)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.6 Terra | Llama 2-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1452 | 999 |
Writing & Preference GPT-5.6 Terra leads
GPT-5.6 Terra: 70.4 (#21), Llama 2-7B: 28.1 (#293)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.6 Terra | Llama 2-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1446 | 1053 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1411 | 1033 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1451 | 1029 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1855 | — |
| EQ-Bench 4 | 1234 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is GPT-5.6 Terra better than Llama 2-7B?
GPT-5.6 Terra is the stronger model overall, scoring 59.1 to 28.6 on the Noometry Index.
Is GPT-5.6 Terra or Llama 2-7B better for coding?
GPT-5.6 Terra scores higher on coding benchmarks: 57.1 versus 28.7 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do GPT-5.6 Terra and Llama 2-7B share?
17 benchmarks have published results for both models. GPT-5.6 Terra has 52 scored results on Noometry and Llama 2-7B has 29.