Model comparison

Granite 3.1 2b Instruct vs Step 3

Step 3 is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.5 to 33.2 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 12 shared benchmarks.

Granite 3.1 2b Instruct IBM

33.2

Rank #247 Confirmed

Step 3 StepFun

40.5

Rank #149 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. Granite 3.1 2b Instruct scores higher in 0 categories and Step 3 in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Step 3 leads 54.3 to 34.1.

Side by side

Granite 3.1 2b Instruct and Step 3 specifications
Granite 3.1 2b InstructStep 3
ProviderIBMStepFun
Noometry Index33.240.5
Released——
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window——
Max output——
Input $ / M tokens——
Output $ / M tokens——
Results tracked1217

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding Step 3 leads

Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 33.4 (#257), Step 3: 40.1 (#147)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.1 2b InstructStep 3
LMArena Coding11491367

Reasoning Step 3 leads

Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 22.0 (#209), Step 3: 28.4 (#105)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.1 2b InstructStep 3
LMArena Hard Prompts11381355
Kagi LLM Benchmark—62.3%

Math Step 3 leads

Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 33.1 (#206), Step 3: 37.6 (#148)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.1 2b InstructStep 3
LMArena Math11591366

Knowledge Step 3 leads

Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 30.8 (#224), Step 3: 36.8 (#164)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.1 2b InstructStep 3
LMArena Expert11311333

Multimodal Not comparable

Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: —, Step 3: 35.5 (#86)

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.1 2b InstructStep 3
LMArena Vision—1177

Multilingual Step 3 leads

Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 29.1 (#269), Step 3: 46.3 (#159)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.1 2b InstructStep 3
LMArena Non-English10681327
LMArena Chinese11391397
LMArena Russian10631331
LMArena German—1371
LMArena Korean—1269
LMArena Spanish—1371

Instruction Following Step 3 leads

Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 57.7 (#264), Step 3: 70.4 (#164)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.1 2b InstructStep 3
LMArena Instruction Following11161332

Long Context Step 3 leads

Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 35.0 (#244), Step 3: 40.3 (#157)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.1 2b InstructStep 3
LMArena Longer Query11551326

Writing & Preference Step 3 leads

Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 34.1 (#274), Step 3: 54.3 (#151)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.1 2b InstructStep 3
LMArena Text11271350
LMArena Creative Writing11161321
LMArena Multi-Turn10991341

Frequently asked questions

Is Granite 3.1 2b Instruct better than Step 3?

Step 3 is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.5 to 33.2 on the Noometry Index.

Is Granite 3.1 2b Instruct or Step 3 better for coding?

Step 3 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 40.1 versus 33.4 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Granite 3.1 2b Instruct and Step 3 share?

12 benchmarks have published results for both models. Granite 3.1 2b Instruct has 12 scored results on Noometry and Step 3 has 17.

Related comparisons

Go deeper