Model comparison
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct vs Llama 2-7B
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 32.6 to 28.6 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 12 shared benchmarks.
MetaSummary
- They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. Granite 3.1 2b Instruct scores higher in 8 categories and Llama 2-7B in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in instruction following, where Granite 3.1 2b Instruct leads 58.0 to 51.0.
Side by side
| Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | Llama 2-7B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | IBM | Meta |
| Noometry Index | 32.6 | 28.6 |
| Released | — | 2023-07-18 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | — | — |
| Max output | — | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Results tracked | 12 | 29 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Granite 3.1 2b Instruct leads
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 32.9 (#255), Llama 2-7B: 28.7 (#302)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | Llama 2-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1149 | 1002 |
Reasoning Granite 3.1 2b Instruct leads
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 21.0 (#206), Llama 2-7B: 15.1 (#309)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | Llama 2-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1138 | 1009 |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 0% |
| BIG-Bench Hard | — | 39.2% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 98.54 |
| HellaSwag | — | 77.2% |
| LAMBADA | — | 73.3% |
| PIQA | — | 78.8% |
| WinoGrande | — | 69.2% |
Math Granite 3.1 2b Instruct leads
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 30.6 (#206), Llama 2-7B: 28.2 (#231)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | Llama 2-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1159 | 1042 |
| GSM8K | — | 16.7% |
Knowledge Granite 3.1 2b Instruct leads
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 30.3 (#223), Llama 2-7B: 27.7 (#243)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | Llama 2-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1131 | 1036 |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | — | 45.9% |
| BoolQ | — | 77.9% |
| MMLU | — | 45.8% |
| OpenBookQA | — | 58.6% |
| TriviaQA | — | 73.7% |
Multimodal Not comparable
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: —, Llama 2-7B: —
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | Llama 2-7B |
|---|---|---|
| ScienceQA | — | 43.1% |
Multilingual Granite 3.1 2b Instruct leads
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 29.2 (#264), Llama 2-7B: 23.9 (#288)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | Llama 2-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1068 | 973 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1138 | 973 |
| LMArena Russian | 1063 | 995 |
| LMArena French | — | 969 |
| LMArena German | — | 978 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1007 |
Instruction Following Granite 3.1 2b Instruct leads
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 58.0 (#259), Llama 2-7B: 51.0 (#293)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | Llama 2-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1116 | 1006 |
Long Context Granite 3.1 2b Instruct leads
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 35.0 (#239), Llama 2-7B: 30.4 (#282)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | Llama 2-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1155 | 999 |
Writing & Preference Granite 3.1 2b Instruct leads
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 34.3 (#269), Llama 2-7B: 28.1 (#293)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | Llama 2-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1127 | 1053 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1116 | 1033 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1099 | 1029 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Granite 3.1 2b Instruct better than Llama 2-7B?
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 32.6 to 28.6 on the Noometry Index.
Is Granite 3.1 2b Instruct or Llama 2-7B better for coding?
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct scores higher on coding benchmarks: 32.9 versus 28.7 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Granite 3.1 2b Instruct and Llama 2-7B share?
12 benchmarks have published results for both models. Granite 3.1 2b Instruct has 12 scored results on Noometry and Llama 2-7B has 29.