Model comparison

Granite 3.0 8b Instruct vs Llama 3.2 3B

Granite 3.0 8b Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 31.6 to 28.9 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 14 shared benchmarks.

Granite 3.0 8b Instruct IBM

31.6

Rank #270 Confirmed

Llama 3.2 3B Meta

28.9

Rank #321 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 14 benchmarks with published results for both. Granite 3.0 8b Instruct scores higher in 5 categories and Llama 3.2 3B in 3 categories; 3 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Granite 3.0 8b Instruct leads 31.1 to 24.7.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is BigCodeBench Complete: 35.4% for Granite 3.0 8b Instruct and 28.3% for Llama 3.2 3B.

Side by side

Granite 3.0 8b Instruct and Llama 3.2 3B specifications
Granite 3.0 8b InstructLlama 3.2 3B
ProviderIBMMeta
Noometry Index31.628.9
Released—2024-09-24
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window—131K
Max output—118K
Input $ / M tokens—$0.05
Output $ / M tokens—$0.33
Results tracked1418

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

Category by category

Coding Granite 3.0 8b Instruct leads

Granite 3.0 8b Instruct: 29.7 (#301), Llama 3.2 3B: 27.6 (#319)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.0 8b InstructLlama 3.2 3B
BigCodeBench Instruct29.3%23.4%
LMArena Coding11121098
BigCodeBench Complete35.4%28.3%

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Granite 3.0 8b Instruct: —, Llama 3.2 3B: 20.1 (#143)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.0 8b InstructLlama 3.2 3B
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard—21.9%
BALROG—10.1%

Reasoning Too close to call

Granite 3.0 8b Instruct: 20.9 (#230), Llama 3.2 3B: 21.0 (#228)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.0 8b InstructLlama 3.2 3B
LMArena Hard Prompts10921095

Math Too close to call

Granite 3.0 8b Instruct: 32.8 (#210), Llama 3.2 3B: 32.4 (#214)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.0 8b InstructLlama 3.2 3B
LMArena Math11431126

Knowledge Too close to call

Granite 3.0 8b Instruct: 29.6 (#236), Llama 3.2 3B: 29.7 (#235)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.0 8b InstructLlama 3.2 3B
LMArena Expert10871090

Multilingual Granite 3.0 8b Instruct leads

Granite 3.0 8b Instruct: 27.2 (#276), Llama 3.2 3B: 26.2 (#281)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.0 8b InstructLlama 3.2 3B
LMArena Non-English10371019
LMArena Chinese10631017
LMArena Russian1060949
LMArena German—1056

Instruction Following Too close to call

Granite 3.0 8b Instruct: 56.0 (#276), Llama 3.2 3B: 56.0 (#275)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.0 8b InstructLlama 3.2 3B
LMArena Instruction Following10881089

Long Context Too close to call

Granite 3.0 8b Instruct: 34.0 (#252), Llama 3.2 3B: 33.4 (#261)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.0 8b InstructLlama 3.2 3B
LMArena Longer Query11221100

Writing & Preference Granite 3.0 8b Instruct leads

Granite 3.0 8b Instruct: 31.1 (#285), Llama 3.2 3B: 24.7 (#307)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.0 8b InstructLlama 3.2 3B
LMArena Text10961110
LMArena Creative Writing10711094
LMArena Multi-Turn10631105
EQ-Bench Creative Writing—595

Frequently asked questions

Is Granite 3.0 8b Instruct better than Llama 3.2 3B?

Granite 3.0 8b Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 31.6 to 28.9 on the Noometry Index.

Is Granite 3.0 8b Instruct or Llama 3.2 3B better for coding?

Granite 3.0 8b Instruct scores higher on coding benchmarks: 29.7 versus 27.6 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Granite 3.0 8b Instruct and Llama 3.2 3B share?

14 benchmarks have published results for both models. Granite 3.0 8b Instruct has 14 scored results on Noometry and Llama 3.2 3B has 18.

Related comparisons

Go deeper