Model comparison

Granite 3.1 2b Instruct vs Llama 3.1-405B

Granite 3.1 2b Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 32.6 to 30.4 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 12 shared benchmarks.

Granite 3.1 2b Instruct IBM

32.6

Rank #243 Confirmed

Llama 3.1-405B Meta

30.4

Rank #279 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. Granite 3.1 2b Instruct scores higher in 3 categories and Llama 3.1-405B in 5 categories; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where Granite 3.1 2b Instruct leads 30.6 to 17.3.

Side by side

Granite 3.1 2b Instruct and Llama 3.1-405B specifications
Granite 3.1 2b InstructLlama 3.1-405B
ProviderIBMMeta
Noometry Index32.630.4
Released—2024-07-23
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window——
Max output——
Input $ / M tokens——
Output $ / M tokens——
Results tracked1242

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

Category by category

Coding Too close to call

Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 32.9 (#255), Llama 3.1-405B: 32.7 (#257)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.1 2b InstructLlama 3.1-405B
LMArena Coding11491291
WeirdML—21.4%

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: —, Llama 3.1-405B: 20.9 (#131)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.1 2b InstructLlama 3.1-405B
TheAgentCompany—7.4%
Cybench—7.5%

Reasoning Granite 3.1 2b Instruct leads

Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 21.0 (#206), Llama 3.1-405B: 16.4 (#293)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.1 2b InstructLlama 3.1-405B
LMArena Hard Prompts11381270
SimpleBench—23%
Kagi LLM Benchmark—45%
DTBench—61.4%
BIG-Bench Hard—82.9%
Epoch Capabilities Index—128.76
ForecastBench—59.9
HellaSwag—89.2%
PIQA—85.9%
WinoGrande—89.2%

Math Granite 3.1 2b Instruct leads

Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 30.6 (#206), Llama 3.1-405B: 17.3 (#283)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.1 2b InstructLlama 3.1-405B
LMArena Math11591281
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—9.7%
Omni-MATH—24.9%
MATH Level 5—49.8%

Knowledge Too close to call

Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 30.3 (#223), Llama 3.1-405B: 30.4 (#221)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.1 2b InstructLlama 3.1-405B
LMArena Expert11311243
GPQA Diamond—50.9%
MMLU-Pro—72.3%
Confabulations—17.6%
GPQA (HELM)—52.2%
ARC (AI2) Challenge—95.3%
MMLU—84.5%
TriviaQA—82.7%

Multilingual Llama 3.1-405B leads

Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 29.2 (#264), Llama 3.1-405B: 40.9 (#209)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.1 2b InstructLlama 3.1-405B
LMArena Non-English10681248
LMArena Chinese11381242
LMArena Russian10631265
LMArena French—1278
LMArena German—1252
LMArena Japanese—1208
LMArena Korean—1184
LMArena Spanish—1259

Instruction Following Llama 3.1-405B leads

Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 58.0 (#259), Llama 3.1-405B: 66.1 (#209)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.1 2b InstructLlama 3.1-405B
LMArena Instruction Following11161259
IFEval—81.1%

Long Context Llama 3.1-405B leads

Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 35.0 (#239), Llama 3.1-405B: 38.4 (#192)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.1 2b InstructLlama 3.1-405B
LMArena Longer Query11551266

Writing & Preference Llama 3.1-405B leads

Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 34.3 (#269), Llama 3.1-405B: 39.1 (#246)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.1 2b InstructLlama 3.1-405B
LMArena Text11271284
LMArena Creative Writing11161262
LMArena Multi-Turn10991297
EQ-Bench Creative Writing—870
WildBench—78.3%

Frequently asked questions

Is Granite 3.1 2b Instruct better than Llama 3.1-405B?

Granite 3.1 2b Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 32.6 to 30.4 on the Noometry Index.

Is Granite 3.1 2b Instruct or Llama 3.1-405B better for coding?

They score almost the same on coding (32.9 vs 32.7); test both on your own repository before choosing.

How many benchmarks do Granite 3.1 2b Instruct and Llama 3.1-405B share?

12 benchmarks have published results for both models. Granite 3.1 2b Instruct has 12 scored results on Noometry and Llama 3.1-405B has 42.

Related comparisons

Go deeper