Model comparison
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct vs o3-pro
o3-pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.9 to 33.2 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- The widest gap is in long context, where o3-pro leads 72.2 to 35.0.
- Granite 3.1 2b Instruct has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | o3-pro | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | IBM | OpenAI |
| Noometry Index | 33.2 | 42.9 |
| Released | — | 2025-06-10 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | — | 200K |
| Max output | — | 100K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $20 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $80 |
| Results tracked | 12 | 12 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding o3-pro leads
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 33.4 (#257), o3-pro: 55.5 (#24)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | o3-pro |
|---|---|---|
| Aider Polyglot | — | 84.9% |
| WeirdML | — | 58.2% |
| LMArena Coding | 1149 | — |
Reasoning o3-pro leads
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 22.0 (#209), o3-pro: 23.8 (#171)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | o3-pro |
|---|---|---|
| ARC-AGI-2 | — | 4.9% |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 72.1% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | — | 59.3% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1138 | — |
| DTBench | — | 86.9% |
| LMCA | — | 38.5% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 147.42 |
Math Not comparable
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 33.1 (#206), o3-pro: —
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | o3-pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1159 | — |
Knowledge Granite 3.1 2b Instruct leads
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 30.8 (#224), o3-pro: 29.5 (#238)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | o3-pro |
|---|---|---|
| Confabulations | — | 14.2% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 23.3% |
| LMArena Expert | 1131 | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 29.1 (#269), o3-pro: —
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | o3-pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1068 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1139 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1063 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 57.7 (#264), o3-pro: —
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | o3-pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1116 | — |
Long Context o3-pro leads
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 35.0 (#244), o3-pro: 72.2 (#1)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | o3-pro |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 97.2% |
| LMArena Longer Query | 1155 | — |
Writing & Preference o3-pro leads
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 34.1 (#274), o3-pro: 57.1 (#133)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | o3-pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1127 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1116 | — |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | — | 84.4% |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1099 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Granite 3.1 2b Instruct better than o3-pro?
o3-pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.9 to 33.2 on the Noometry Index.
Is Granite 3.1 2b Instruct or o3-pro better for coding?
o3-pro scores higher on coding benchmarks: 55.5 versus 33.4 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Granite 3.1 2b Instruct and o3-pro share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Granite 3.1 2b Instruct has 12 scored results on Noometry and o3-pro has 12.