Model comparison
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct vs Llama 4 Scout
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 33.2 to 27.7 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 4 categories and Llama 4 Scout in 4 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Granite 3.1 2b Instruct leads 33.1 to 19.6.
Side by side
| Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | Llama 4 Scout | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | IBM | Meta |
| Noometry Index | 33.2 | 27.7 |
| Released | — | 2025-04-05 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | — | 128K |
| Max output | — | 4K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.10 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $0.30 |
| Results tracked | 12 | 43 |
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 4 Scout: 20.2 (#339)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | Llama 4 Scout |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1149 | 1286 |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | — | 9.1% |
| SciCode | — | 17% |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 43.1% |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: —, Llama 4 Scout: 24.6 (#119)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | Llama 4 Scout |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 28.1% |
Reasoning Granite 3.1 2b Instruct leads
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 22.0 (#209), Llama 4 Scout: 9.1 (#345)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | Llama 4 Scout |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1138 | 1266 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | — | 0% |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 36.9% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | — | 0.5% |
| CritPt | — | 0% |
| DTBench | — | 57.9% |
| LMCA | — | 12% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 129.64 |
| ForecastBench | — | 57.5 |
Math Granite 3.1 2b Instruct leads
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 33.1 (#206), Llama 4 Scout: 19.6 (#286)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | Llama 4 Scout |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1159 | 1287 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 7.8% |
| Omni-MATH | — | 37.3% |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 62.3% |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 0% |
Knowledge Llama 4 Scout leads
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 30.8 (#224), Llama 4 Scout: 31.9 (#217)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | Llama 4 Scout |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1131 | 1235 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 51.8% |
| MMLU-Pro | — | 74.2% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 7.7% |
| GPQA (HELM) | — | 50.7% |
Multimodal Not comparable
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: —, Llama 4 Scout: 32.2 (#102)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | Llama 4 Scout |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1118 |
| SpatialViz-Bench | — | 34.2% |
Multilingual Llama 4 Scout leads
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 29.1 (#269), Llama 4 Scout: 41.0 (#212)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | Llama 4 Scout |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1068 | 1252 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1139 | 1255 |
| LMArena Russian | 1063 | 1263 |
| LMArena French | — | 1282 |
| LMArena German | — | 1272 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1206 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1207 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1278 |
Instruction Following Llama 4 Scout leads
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 57.7 (#264), Llama 4 Scout: 65.8 (#217)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | Llama 4 Scout |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1116 | 1248 |
| IFEval | — | 81.8% |
Long Context Granite 3.1 2b Instruct leads
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 35.0 (#244), Llama 4 Scout: 27.5 (#294)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | Llama 4 Scout |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1155 | 1265 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 36% |
Writing & Preference Llama 4 Scout leads
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 34.1 (#274), Llama 4 Scout: 37.0 (#261)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | Llama 4 Scout |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1127 | 1279 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1116 | 1249 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1099 | 1280 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 783 |
| WildBench | — | 78% |
Frequently asked questions
Is Granite 3.1 2b Instruct better than Llama 4 Scout?
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 33.2 to 27.7 on the Noometry Index.
Is Granite 3.1 2b Instruct or Llama 4 Scout 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 4 Scout share?
12 benchmarks have published results for both models. Granite 3.1 2b Instruct has 12 scored results on Noometry and Llama 4 Scout has 43.