Model comparison
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct vs Mistral Nemo
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 33.2 to 26.4 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.
Mistral AISummary
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Granite 3.1 2b Instruct leads 30.8 to 12.3.
Side by side
| Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | Mistral Nemo | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | IBM | Mistral AI |
| Noometry Index | 33.2 | 26.4 |
| Released | — | 2024-07-01 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | — | 128K |
| Max output | — | 128K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.15 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $0.15 |
| Results tracked | 12 | 10 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Not comparable
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 33.4 (#257), Mistral Nemo: —
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | Mistral Nemo |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1149 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: —, Mistral Nemo: 23.5 (#125)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | Mistral Nemo |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 27.6% |
| BALROG | — | 17.6% |
Reasoning Granite 3.1 2b Instruct leads
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 22.0 (#209), Mistral Nemo: 20.7 (#232)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | Mistral Nemo |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1138 | — |
| DTBench | — | 48.6% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 118.68 |
| PIQA | — | 83.5% |
Math Granite 3.1 2b Instruct leads
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 33.1 (#206), Mistral Nemo: 25.5 (#268)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | Mistral Nemo |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1159 | — |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 10.8% |
| GSM8K | — | 84.2% |
Knowledge Granite 3.1 2b Instruct leads
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 30.8 (#224), Mistral Nemo: 12.3 (#298)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | Mistral Nemo |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 29.9% |
| LMArena Expert | 1131 | — |
| BoolQ | — | 82.5% |
Multilingual Not comparable
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 29.1 (#269), Mistral Nemo: —
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | Mistral Nemo |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1068 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1139 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1063 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 57.7 (#264), Mistral Nemo: —
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | Mistral Nemo |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1116 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 35.0 (#244), Mistral Nemo: —
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | Mistral Nemo |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1155 | — |
Writing & Preference Granite 3.1 2b Instruct leads
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 34.1 (#274), Mistral Nemo: 28.5 (#296)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | Mistral Nemo |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1127 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1116 | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 881 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1099 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Granite 3.1 2b Instruct better than Mistral Nemo?
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 33.2 to 26.4 on the Noometry Index.
How many benchmarks do Granite 3.1 2b Instruct and Mistral Nemo share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Granite 3.1 2b Instruct has 12 scored results on Noometry and Mistral Nemo has 10.