Model comparison

Granite 3.1 8b Instruct vs Llama 3.2 3B

Granite 3.1 8b Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 32.4 to 28.9 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 13 shared benchmarks.

Granite 3.1 8b Instruct IBM

32.4

Rank #258 Confirmed

Llama 3.2 3B Meta

28.9

Rank #321 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 3B in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Granite 3.1 8b Instruct leads 35.5 to 24.7.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard: 27.1% for Granite 3.1 8b Instruct and 21.9% for Llama 3.2 3B.

Side by side

Granite 3.1 8b Instruct and Llama 3.2 3B specifications
Granite 3.1 8b InstructLlama 3.2 3B
ProviderIBMMeta
Noometry Index32.428.9
Released—2024-09-24
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window—131K
Max output—118K
Input $ / M tokens—$0.05
Output $ / M tokens—$0.33
Results tracked1318

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 3B: 27.6 (#319)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.1 8b InstructLlama 3.2 3B
LMArena Coding11861098
BigCodeBench Instruct—23.4%
BigCodeBench Complete—28.3%

Agentic & Tool Use Granite 3.1 8b Instruct leads

Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 24.1 (#120), Llama 3.2 3B: 20.1 (#143)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.1 8b InstructLlama 3.2 3B
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard27.1%21.9%
BALROG—10.1%

Reasoning Granite 3.1 8b Instruct leads

Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 22.1 (#207), Llama 3.2 3B: 21.0 (#228)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.1 8b InstructLlama 3.2 3B
LMArena Hard Prompts11451095

Math Too close to call

Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 33.0 (#209), Llama 3.2 3B: 32.4 (#214)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.1 8b InstructLlama 3.2 3B
LMArena Math11521126

Knowledge Granite 3.1 8b Instruct leads

Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 31.1 (#220), Llama 3.2 3B: 29.7 (#235)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.1 8b InstructLlama 3.2 3B
LMArena Expert11421090

Multilingual Granite 3.1 8b Instruct leads

Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 30.9 (#260), Llama 3.2 3B: 26.2 (#281)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.1 8b InstructLlama 3.2 3B
LMArena Non-English10991019
LMArena Chinese11451017
LMArena Russian1092949
LMArena German—1056

Instruction Following Granite 3.1 8b Instruct leads

Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 58.6 (#259), Llama 3.2 3B: 56.0 (#275)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.1 8b InstructLlama 3.2 3B
LMArena Instruction Following11311089

Long Context Granite 3.1 8b Instruct leads

Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 35.2 (#241), Llama 3.2 3B: 33.4 (#261)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.1 8b InstructLlama 3.2 3B
LMArena Longer Query11621100

Writing & Preference Granite 3.1 8b Instruct leads

Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 35.5 (#266), Llama 3.2 3B: 24.7 (#307)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.1 8b InstructLlama 3.2 3B
LMArena Text11501110
LMArena Creative Writing11291094
LMArena Multi-Turn11081105
EQ-Bench Creative Writing—595

Frequently asked questions

Is Granite 3.1 8b Instruct better than Llama 3.2 3B?

Granite 3.1 8b Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 32.4 to 28.9 on the Noometry Index.

Is Granite 3.1 8b Instruct or Llama 3.2 3B better for coding?

Granite 3.1 8b Instruct scores higher on coding benchmarks: 34.5 versus 27.6 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Granite 3.1 8b Instruct and Llama 3.2 3B share?

13 benchmarks have published results for both models. Granite 3.1 8b Instruct has 13 scored results on Noometry and Llama 3.2 3B has 18.

Related comparisons

Go deeper