Model comparison

Granite 3.1 2b Instruct vs Llama 3-8B

Granite 3.1 2b Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 32.6 to 25.3 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 12 shared benchmarks.

Granite 3.1 2b Instruct IBM

32.6

Rank #243 Confirmed

Llama 3-8B Meta

25.3

Rank #338 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. Granite 3.1 2b Instruct scores higher in 5 categories and Llama 3-8B in 3 categories; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where Granite 3.1 2b Instruct leads 30.3 to 7.8.

Side by side

Granite 3.1 2b Instruct and Llama 3-8B specifications
Granite 3.1 2b InstructLlama 3-8B
ProviderIBMMeta
Noometry Index32.625.3
Released—2024-04-18
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window—8K
Max output—8K
Input $ / M tokens—$0.14
Output $ / M tokens—$0.14
Results tracked1234

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 3-8B: 30.5 (#285)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.1 2b InstructLlama 3-8B
LMArena Coding11491152
BigCodeBench Instruct—31.9%
BigCodeBench Complete—36.9%
HumanEval+—56.7%
MBPP+—54.8%

Reasoning Granite 3.1 2b Instruct leads

Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 21.0 (#206), Llama 3-8B: 13.8 (#321)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.1 2b InstructLlama 3-8B
LMArena Hard Prompts11381133
Chess Puzzles—0%
DTBench—43.9%
Adversarial NLI—57.3%
Epoch Capabilities Index—116.33
ForecastBench—58.6
WinoGrande—75.7%

Math Granite 3.1 2b Instruct leads

Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 30.6 (#206), Llama 3-8B: 8.3 (#317)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.1 2b InstructLlama 3-8B
LMArena Math11591151
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—1.9%
MATH Level 5—6.1%

Knowledge Granite 3.1 2b Instruct leads

Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 30.3 (#223), Llama 3-8B: 7.8 (#303)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.1 2b InstructLlama 3-8B
LMArena Expert11311113
GPQA Diamond—26.1%
ARC (AI2) Challenge—82.8%
MMLU—68.8%
OpenBookQA—82.6%
TriviaQA—67.7%

Multilingual Llama 3-8B leads

Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 29.2 (#264), Llama 3-8B: 31.0 (#256)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.1 2b InstructLlama 3-8B
LMArena Non-English10681098
LMArena Chinese11381076
LMArena Russian10631109
LMArena French—1158
LMArena German—1104
LMArena Japanese—967
LMArena Korean—1003
LMArena Spanish—1172

Instruction Following Too close to call

Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 58.0 (#259), Llama 3-8B: 58.7 (#255)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.1 2b InstructLlama 3-8B
LMArena Instruction Following11161127

Long Context Too close to call

Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 35.0 (#239), Llama 3-8B: 34.2 (#246)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.1 2b InstructLlama 3-8B
LMArena Longer Query11551128

Writing & Preference Llama 3-8B leads

Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 34.3 (#269), Llama 3-8B: 37.7 (#251)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.1 2b InstructLlama 3-8B
LMArena Text11271166
LMArena Creative Writing11161150
LMArena Multi-Turn10991152

Frequently asked questions

Is Granite 3.1 2b Instruct better than Llama 3-8B?

Granite 3.1 2b Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 32.6 to 25.3 on the Noometry Index.

Is Granite 3.1 2b Instruct or Llama 3-8B better for coding?

Granite 3.1 2b Instruct scores higher on coding benchmarks: 32.9 versus 30.5 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Granite 3.1 2b Instruct and Llama 3-8B share?

12 benchmarks have published results for both models. Granite 3.1 2b Instruct has 12 scored results on Noometry and Llama 3-8B has 34.

Related comparisons

Go deeper