Model comparison

Granite 3.1 8b Instruct vs Llama 3.2 1B

Granite 3.1 8b Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 32.4 to 20.1 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 13 shared benchmarks.

Granite 3.1 8b Instruct IBM

32.4

Rank #258 Confirmed

Llama 3.2 1B Meta

20.1

Rank #354 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 13 benchmarks with published results for both. Granite 3.1 8b Instruct scores higher in 9 categories and Llama 3.2 1B in 0 categories; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where Granite 3.1 8b Instruct leads 31.1 to 7.2.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard: 27.1% for Granite 3.1 8b Instruct and 10.8% for Llama 3.2 1B.

Side by side

Granite 3.1 8b Instruct and Llama 3.2 1B specifications
Granite 3.1 8b InstructLlama 3.2 1B
ProviderIBMMeta
Noometry Index32.420.1
Released—2024-09-24
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window—60K
Max output—54K
Input $ / M tokens—$0.027
Output $ / M tokens—$0.20
Results tracked1322

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

Category by category

Coding Granite 3.1 8b Instruct leads

Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 34.5 (#233), Llama 3.2 1B: 21.1 (#338)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.1 8b InstructLlama 3.2 1B
LMArena Coding11861070
BigCodeBench Instruct—8.2%
BigCodeBench Complete—11.3%

Agentic & Tool Use Granite 3.1 8b Instruct leads

Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 24.1 (#120), Llama 3.2 1B: 14.6 (#150)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.1 8b InstructLlama 3.2 1B
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard27.1%10.8%
BALROG—6.6%

Reasoning Granite 3.1 8b Instruct leads

Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 22.1 (#207), Llama 3.2 1B: 16.2 (#308)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.1 8b InstructLlama 3.2 1B
LMArena Hard Prompts11451044
Chess Puzzles—0%
Epoch Capabilities Index—101.99

Math Granite 3.1 8b Instruct leads

Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 33.0 (#209), Llama 3.2 1B: 10.4 (#313)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.1 8b InstructLlama 3.2 1B
LMArena Math11521086
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—0.6%

Knowledge Granite 3.1 8b Instruct leads

Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 31.1 (#220), Llama 3.2 1B: 7.2 (#312)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.1 8b InstructLlama 3.2 1B
LMArena Expert11421007
GPQA Diamond—23.9%

Multilingual Granite 3.1 8b Instruct leads

Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 30.9 (#260), Llama 3.2 1B: 23.8 (#292)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.1 8b InstructLlama 3.2 1B
LMArena Non-English1099973
LMArena Chinese1145959
LMArena Russian1092941
LMArena German—1014

Instruction Following Granite 3.1 8b Instruct leads

Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 58.6 (#259), Llama 3.2 1B: 52.4 (#290)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.1 8b InstructLlama 3.2 1B
LMArena Instruction Following11311031

Long Context Granite 3.1 8b Instruct leads

Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 35.2 (#241), Llama 3.2 1B: 31.9 (#274)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.1 8b InstructLlama 3.2 1B
LMArena Longer Query11621050

Writing & Preference Granite 3.1 8b Instruct leads

Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 35.5 (#266), Llama 3.2 1B: 21.3 (#310)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.1 8b InstructLlama 3.2 1B
LMArena Text11501055
LMArena Creative Writing11291033
LMArena Multi-Turn11081030
EQ-Bench Creative Writing—200

Frequently asked questions

Is Granite 3.1 8b Instruct better than Llama 3.2 1B?

Granite 3.1 8b Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 32.4 to 20.1 on the Noometry Index.

Is Granite 3.1 8b Instruct or Llama 3.2 1B better for coding?

Granite 3.1 8b Instruct scores higher on coding benchmarks: 34.5 versus 21.1 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Granite 3.1 8b Instruct and Llama 3.2 1B share?

13 benchmarks have published results for both models. Granite 3.1 8b Instruct has 13 scored results on Noometry and Llama 3.2 1B has 22.

Related comparisons

Go deeper