Model comparison

Granite 3.0 2b Instruct vs Granite 3.1 8b Instruct

Granite 3.1 8b Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 31.8 to 30.2 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 12 shared benchmarks.

Granite 3.0 2b Instruct IBM

30.2

Rank #284 Confirmed

Granite 3.1 8b Instruct IBM

31.8

Rank #256 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. Granite 3.0 2b Instruct scores higher in 0 categories and Granite 3.1 8b Instruct in 8 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in coding, where Granite 3.1 8b Instruct leads 33.9 to 27.8.

Side by side

Granite 3.0 2b Instruct and Granite 3.1 8b Instruct specifications
Granite 3.0 2b InstructGranite 3.1 8b Instruct
ProviderIBMIBM
Noometry Index30.231.8
Released——
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window——
Max output——
Input $ / M tokens——
Output $ / M tokens——
Results tracked1313

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

Category by category

Coding Granite 3.1 8b Instruct leads

Granite 3.0 2b Instruct: 27.8 (#311), Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 33.9 (#232)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.0 2b InstructGranite 3.1 8b Instruct
LMArena Coding10901186
BigCodeBench Instruct20.5%—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Granite 3.0 2b Instruct: —, Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 23.9 (#113)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.0 2b InstructGranite 3.1 8b Instruct
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard—27.1%

Reasoning Granite 3.1 8b Instruct leads

Granite 3.0 2b Instruct: 19.6 (#234), Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 21.2 (#204)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.0 2b InstructGranite 3.1 8b Instruct
LMArena Hard Prompts10731146

Math Too close to call

Granite 3.0 2b Instruct: 29.7 (#215), Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 30.4 (#210)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.0 2b InstructGranite 3.1 8b Instruct
LMArena Math11171152

Knowledge Granite 3.1 8b Instruct leads

Granite 3.0 2b Instruct: 28.4 (#238), Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 30.6 (#218)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.0 2b InstructGranite 3.1 8b Instruct
LMArena Expert10641142

Multilingual Granite 3.1 8b Instruct leads

Granite 3.0 2b Instruct: 27.1 (#273), Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 31.1 (#255)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.0 2b InstructGranite 3.1 8b Instruct
LMArena Non-English10331099
LMArena Chinese10701145
LMArena Russian10451092

Instruction Following Granite 3.1 8b Instruct leads

Granite 3.0 2b Instruct: 54.2 (#279), Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 58.9 (#254)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.0 2b InstructGranite 3.1 8b Instruct
LMArena Instruction Following10561131

Long Context Granite 3.1 8b Instruct leads

Granite 3.0 2b Instruct: 32.5 (#263), Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 35.2 (#236)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.0 2b InstructGranite 3.1 8b Instruct
LMArena Longer Query10711162

Writing & Preference Granite 3.1 8b Instruct leads

Granite 3.0 2b Instruct: 29.8 (#287), Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 35.7 (#261)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.0 2b InstructGranite 3.1 8b Instruct
LMArena Text10801150
LMArena Creative Writing10461129
LMArena Multi-Turn10531108

Frequently asked questions

Is Granite 3.0 2b Instruct better than Granite 3.1 8b Instruct?

Granite 3.1 8b Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 31.8 to 30.2 on the Noometry Index.

Is Granite 3.0 2b Instruct or Granite 3.1 8b Instruct better for coding?

Granite 3.1 8b Instruct scores higher on coding benchmarks: 33.9 versus 27.8 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Granite 3.0 2b Instruct and Granite 3.1 8b Instruct share?

12 benchmarks have published results for both models. Granite 3.0 2b Instruct has 13 scored results on Noometry and Granite 3.1 8b Instruct has 13.

Related comparisons

Go deeper