Model comparison

Granite 3.1 2b Instruct vs Llama 3.1-8B

Granite 3.1 2b Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 33.2 to 23.0 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 12 shared benchmarks.

Granite 3.1 2b Instruct IBM

33.2

Rank #247 Confirmed

Llama 3.1-8B Meta

23.0

Rank #352 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. Granite 3.1 2b Instruct scores higher in 5 categories and Llama 3.1-8B in 3 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where Granite 3.1 2b Instruct leads 33.1 to 10.2.

Side by side

Granite 3.1 2b Instruct and Llama 3.1-8B specifications
Granite 3.1 2b InstructLlama 3.1-8B
ProviderIBMMeta
Noometry Index33.223.0
Released—2024-07-23
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window—128K
Max output—4K
Input $ / M tokens—$0.05
Output $ / M tokens—$0.08
Results tracked1243

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: 33.4 (#257), Llama 3.1-8B: 20.2 (#340)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.1 2b InstructLlama 3.1-8B
LMArena Coding11491195
SciCode—13.2%
WeirdML—1.7%
BigCodeBench Instruct—32.8%
BigCodeBench Complete—40.5%
HumanEval+—62.8%
MBPP+—55.6%

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: —, Llama 3.1-8B: 22.5 (#131)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.1 2b InstructLlama 3.1-8B
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard—25.8%
BALROG—15.1%

Reasoning Granite 3.1 2b Instruct leads

Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 22.0 (#209), Llama 3.1-8B: 14.9 (#321)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.1 2b InstructLlama 3.1-8B
LMArena Hard Prompts11381175
CritPt—0%
Chess Puzzles—0%
DTBench—50.9%
LMCA—5.4%
Epoch Capabilities Index—116.57
PIQA—81.2%

Math Granite 3.1 2b Instruct leads

Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 33.1 (#206), Llama 3.1-8B: 10.2 (#317)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.1 2b InstructLlama 3.1-8B
LMArena Math11591179
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—1.7%
Omni-MATH—13.7%
MATH Level 5—22.9%
GSM8K—82.4%

Knowledge Granite 3.1 2b Instruct leads

Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 30.8 (#224), Llama 3.1-8B: 8.0 (#307)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.1 2b InstructLlama 3.1-8B
LMArena Expert11311144
GPQA Diamond—27%
MMLU-Pro—40.6%
GPQA (HELM)—24.7%
BoolQ—82.8%
MMLU—56.1%

Multilingual Llama 3.1-8B leads

Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 29.1 (#269), Llama 3.1-8B: 34.0 (#249)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.1 2b InstructLlama 3.1-8B
LMArena Non-English10681148
LMArena Chinese11391151
LMArena Russian10631158
LMArena French—1177
LMArena German—1144
LMArena Japanese—1061
LMArena Korean—1053
LMArena Spanish—1169

Instruction Following Llama 3.1-8B leads

Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 57.7 (#264), Llama 3.1-8B: 58.9 (#258)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.1 2b InstructLlama 3.1-8B
LMArena Instruction Following11161159
IFEval—74.3%

Long Context Too close to call

Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 35.0 (#244), Llama 3.1-8B: 35.8 (#238)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.1 2b InstructLlama 3.1-8B
LMArena Longer Query11551182

Writing & Preference Granite 3.1 2b Instruct leads

Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 34.1 (#274), Llama 3.1-8B: 29.7 (#290)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.1 2b InstructLlama 3.1-8B
LMArena Text11271187
LMArena Creative Writing11161154
LMArena Multi-Turn10991172
EQ-Bench Creative Writing—713
WildBench—68.7%

Frequently asked questions

Is Granite 3.1 2b Instruct better than Llama 3.1-8B?

Granite 3.1 2b Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 33.2 to 23.0 on the Noometry Index.

Is Granite 3.1 2b Instruct or Llama 3.1-8B better for coding?

Granite 3.1 2b Instruct scores higher on coding benchmarks: 33.4 versus 20.2 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Granite 3.1 2b Instruct and Llama 3.1-8B share?

12 benchmarks have published results for both models. Granite 3.1 2b Instruct has 12 scored results on Noometry and Llama 3.1-8B has 43.

Related comparisons

Go deeper