Noometry

Model comparison

Granite 3.1 2b Instruct vs Phi 3 Small 8k Instruct

Granite 3.1 2b Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 33.2 to 29.3 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 12 shared benchmarks.

Granite 3.1 2b Instruct IBM

33.2

Rank #247 Confirmed

Phi 3 Small 8k Instruct Microsoft

29.3

Rank #314 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. Granite 3.1 2b Instruct scores higher in 8 categories and Phi 3 Small 8k Instruct in 0 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where Granite 3.1 2b Instruct leads 22.0 to 14.8.

Side by side

Granite 3.1 2b InstructPhi 3 Small 8k Instruct
ProviderIBMMicrosoft
Noometry Index33.229.3
Released—2024-04-23
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window——
Max output——
Input $ / M tokens——
Output $ / M tokens——
Results tracked1232

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), Phi 3 Small 8k Instruct: 27.9 (#318)

BenchmarkGranite 3.1 2b InstructPhi 3 Small 8k Instruct
LMArena Coding11491101
LiveBench Coding—20.3%

Reasoning Granite 3.1 2b Instruct leads

Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 22.0 (#209), Phi 3 Small 8k Instruct: 14.8 (#323)

BenchmarkGranite 3.1 2b InstructPhi 3 Small 8k Instruct
LMArena Hard Prompts11381100
LiveBench Reasoning—15.9%
LiveBench Data Analysis—30.3%
Adversarial NLI—58.1%
BIG-Bench Hard—79.1%
HellaSwag—77%
LiveBench—24%
WinoGrande—81.5%

Math Granite 3.1 2b Instruct leads

Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 33.1 (#206), Phi 3 Small 8k Instruct: 27.6 (#248)

BenchmarkGranite 3.1 2b InstructPhi 3 Small 8k Instruct
LMArena Math11591151
LiveBench Math—17.6%

Knowledge Granite 3.1 2b Instruct leads

Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 30.8 (#224), Phi 3 Small 8k Instruct: 29.1 (#240)

BenchmarkGranite 3.1 2b InstructPhi 3 Small 8k Instruct
LMArena Expert11311067
ARC (AI2) Challenge—90.7%
MMLU—75.7%
OpenBookQA—88%
TriviaQA—58.1%

Multilingual Too close to call

Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 29.1 (#269), Phi 3 Small 8k Instruct: 28.5 (#272)

BenchmarkGranite 3.1 2b InstructPhi 3 Small 8k Instruct
LMArena Non-English10681058
LMArena Chinese11391061
LMArena Russian10631111
LMArena French—1135
LMArena German—1080
LMArena Japanese—966
LMArena Korean—894
LMArena Spanish—1111

Instruction Following Granite 3.1 2b Instruct leads

Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 57.7 (#264), Phi 3 Small 8k Instruct: 51.9 (#292)

BenchmarkGranite 3.1 2b InstructPhi 3 Small 8k Instruct
LMArena Instruction Following11161087
LiveBench Instruction Following—47.2%

Long Context Granite 3.1 2b Instruct leads

Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 35.0 (#244), Phi 3 Small 8k Instruct: 33.0 (#267)

BenchmarkGranite 3.1 2b InstructPhi 3 Small 8k Instruct
LMArena Longer Query11551088

Writing & Preference Granite 3.1 2b Instruct leads

Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 34.1 (#274), Phi 3 Small 8k Instruct: 31.1 (#284)

BenchmarkGranite 3.1 2b InstructPhi 3 Small 8k Instruct
LMArena Text11271110
LMArena Creative Writing11161083
LMArena Multi-Turn10991068
LiveBench Language—12.9%

Frequently asked questions

Is Granite 3.1 2b Instruct better than Phi 3 Small 8k Instruct?

Granite 3.1 2b Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 33.2 to 29.3 on the Noometry Index.

Is Granite 3.1 2b Instruct or Phi 3 Small 8k Instruct better for coding?

Granite 3.1 2b Instruct scores higher on coding benchmarks: 33.4 versus 27.9 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Granite 3.1 2b Instruct and Phi 3 Small 8k Instruct share?

12 benchmarks have published results for both models. Granite 3.1 2b Instruct has 12 scored results on Noometry and Phi 3 Small 8k Instruct has 32.

Related comparisons

Go deeper