Model comparison

GPT-5-Codex vs Llama 3.2 3B

GPT-5-Codex is the stronger model overall, scoring 37.9 to 28.9 on the Noometry Index. Llama 3.2 3B costs 29× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GPT-5-Codex's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.

GPT-5-Codex OpenAI

37.9

Rank #192 Reported

Llama 3.2 3B Meta

28.9

Rank #321 Confirmed

Summary

  • The widest gap is in coding, where GPT-5-Codex leads 42.4 to 27.6.
  • Llama 3.2 3B is cheaper at $0.05 / $0.33 per million input/output tokens, against $1.25 / $10 for GPT-5-Codex.
  • GPT-5-Codex accepts more context: 400K tokens versus 131K.
  • Llama 3.2 3B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

GPT-5-Codex and Llama 3.2 3B specifications
GPT-5-CodexLlama 3.2 3B
ProviderOpenAIMeta
Noometry Index37.928.9
Released2025-09-152024-09-24
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window400K131K
Max output128K118K
Input $ / M tokens$1.25$0.05
Output $ / M tokens$10$0.33
Results tracked318

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

Category by category

Coding GPT-5-Codex leads

GPT-5-Codex: 42.4 (#103), Llama 3.2 3B: 27.6 (#319)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5-CodexLlama 3.2 3B
WeirdML54.5%—
BigCodeBench Instruct—23.4%
LMArena Coding—1098
BigCodeBench Complete—28.3%

Agentic & Tool Use GPT-5-Codex leads

GPT-5-Codex: 31.0 (#72), Llama 3.2 3B: 20.1 (#143)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5-CodexLlama 3.2 3B
Terminal-Bench44.3%—
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard—21.9%
BALROG—10.1%

Reasoning GPT-5-Codex leads

GPT-5-Codex: 30.9 (#83), Llama 3.2 3B: 21.0 (#228)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5-CodexLlama 3.2 3B
Kagi LLM Benchmark70.3%—
LMArena Hard Prompts—1095

Math Not comparable

GPT-5-Codex: —, Llama 3.2 3B: 32.4 (#214)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5-CodexLlama 3.2 3B
LMArena Math—1126

Knowledge Not comparable

GPT-5-Codex: —, Llama 3.2 3B: 29.7 (#235)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5-CodexLlama 3.2 3B
LMArena Expert—1090

Multilingual Not comparable

GPT-5-Codex: —, Llama 3.2 3B: 26.2 (#281)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5-CodexLlama 3.2 3B
LMArena Non-English—1019
LMArena Chinese—1017
LMArena German—1056
LMArena Russian—949

Instruction Following Not comparable

GPT-5-Codex: —, Llama 3.2 3B: 56.0 (#275)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5-CodexLlama 3.2 3B
LMArena Instruction Following—1089

Long Context Not comparable

GPT-5-Codex: —, Llama 3.2 3B: 33.4 (#261)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5-CodexLlama 3.2 3B
LMArena Longer Query—1100

Writing & Preference Not comparable

GPT-5-Codex: —, Llama 3.2 3B: 24.7 (#307)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5-CodexLlama 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-Codex better than Llama 3.2 3B?

GPT-5-Codex is the stronger model overall, scoring 37.9 to 28.9 on the Noometry Index. Llama 3.2 3B costs 29× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GPT-5-Codex's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, GPT-5-Codex 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-Codex lists at $1.25 and $10.

Is GPT-5-Codex or Llama 3.2 3B better for coding?

GPT-5-Codex scores higher on coding benchmarks: 42.4 versus 27.6 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

GPT-5-Codex does, with 400K tokens against 131K.

How many benchmarks do GPT-5-Codex and Llama 3.2 3B share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. GPT-5-Codex has 3 scored results on Noometry and Llama 3.2 3B has 18.

Related comparisons

Go deeper