Model comparison
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct vs Mixtral 8x22B
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 33.2 to 27.1 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 12 shared benchmarks.
Mistral AISummary
- They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. Granite 3.1 2b Instruct scores higher in 6 categories and Mixtral 8x22B in 2 categories; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Granite 3.1 2b Instruct leads 30.8 to 15.1.
Side by side
| Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | Mixtral 8x22B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | IBM | Mistral AI |
| Noometry Index | 33.2 | 27.1 |
| Released | — | 2024-04-17 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | — | 64K |
| Max output | — | 64K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $2 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $6 |
| Results tracked | 12 | 34 |
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), Mixtral 8x22B: 24.2 (#329)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | Mixtral 8x22B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1149 | 1166 |
| WeirdML | — | 3.2% |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 40.6% |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 50.2% |
| HumanEval+ | — | 72% |
| MBPP+ | — | 64.3% |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: —, Mixtral 8x22B: 23.1 (#127)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | Mixtral 8x22B |
|---|---|---|
| Cybench | — | 7.5% |
Reasoning Granite 3.1 2b Instruct leads
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 22.0 (#209), Mixtral 8x22B: 19.9 (#248)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | Mixtral 8x22B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1138 | 1150 |
| DTBench | — | 55.1% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 122.03 |
| ForecastBench | — | 56.3 |
Math Granite 3.1 2b Instruct leads
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 33.1 (#206), Mixtral 8x22B: 22.9 (#275)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | Mixtral 8x22B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1159 | 1184 |
| Omni-MATH | — | 16.3% |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 24.2% |
Knowledge Granite 3.1 2b Instruct leads
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 30.8 (#224), Mixtral 8x22B: 15.1 (#293)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | Mixtral 8x22B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1131 | 1113 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 34.1% |
| MMLU-Pro | — | 46% |
| GPQA (HELM) | — | 33.4% |
| MMLU | — | 77.8% |
Multilingual Mixtral 8x22B leads
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 29.1 (#269), Mixtral 8x22B: 32.8 (#255)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | Mixtral 8x22B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1068 | 1128 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1139 | 1116 |
| LMArena Russian | 1063 | 1158 |
| LMArena French | — | 1166 |
| LMArena German | — | 1141 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1037 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1057 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1151 |
Instruction Following Too close to call
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 57.7 (#264), Mixtral 8x22B: 57.7 (#266)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | Mixtral 8x22B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1116 | 1147 |
| IFEval | — | 72.4% |
Long Context Too close to call
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 35.0 (#244), Mixtral 8x22B: 34.7 (#247)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | Mixtral 8x22B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1155 | 1144 |
Writing & Preference Mixtral 8x22B leads
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 34.1 (#274), Mixtral 8x22B: 36.9 (#262)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | Mixtral 8x22B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1127 | 1162 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1116 | 1141 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1099 | 1130 |
| WildBench | — | 71.1% |
Frequently asked questions
Is Granite 3.1 2b Instruct better than Mixtral 8x22B?
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 33.2 to 27.1 on the Noometry Index.
Is Granite 3.1 2b Instruct or Mixtral 8x22B better for coding?
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct scores higher on coding benchmarks: 33.4 versus 24.2 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Granite 3.1 2b Instruct and Mixtral 8x22B share?
12 benchmarks have published results for both models. Granite 3.1 2b Instruct has 12 scored results on Noometry and Mixtral 8x22B has 34.