Model comparison

Granite 3.1 8b Instruct vs phi-3-medium 14B

Granite 3.1 8b Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 32.4 to 29.7 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.

Granite 3.1 8b Instruct IBM

32.4

Rank #258 Confirmed

phi-3-medium 14B Microsoft

29.7

Rank #306 Reported

Summary

  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where Granite 3.1 8b Instruct leads 31.1 to 9.1.

Side by side

Granite 3.1 8b Instruct and phi-3-medium 14B specifications
Granite 3.1 8b Instructphi-3-medium 14B
ProviderIBMMicrosoft
Noometry Index32.429.7
Released—2024-04-23
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window——
Max output——
Input $ / M tokens——
Output $ / M tokens——
Results tracked1313

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

Category by category

Coding phi-3-medium 14B leads

Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 34.5 (#233), phi-3-medium 14B: 36.8 (#201)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.1 8b Instructphi-3-medium 14B
BigCodeBench Instruct—37.6%
LMArena Coding1186—
BigCodeBench Complete—48.7%

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 24.1 (#120), phi-3-medium 14B: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.1 8b Instructphi-3-medium 14B
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard27.1%—

Reasoning Not comparable

Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 22.1 (#207), phi-3-medium 14B: —

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.1 8b Instructphi-3-medium 14B
LMArena Hard Prompts1145—
Adversarial NLI—55.8%
BIG-Bench Hard—81.4%
Epoch Capabilities Index—121.23
HellaSwag—82.4%
WinoGrande—81.5%

Math Granite 3.1 8b Instruct leads

Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 33.0 (#209), phi-3-medium 14B: 27.3 (#250)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.1 8b Instructphi-3-medium 14B
LMArena Math1152—
MATH Level 5—17.6%

Knowledge Granite 3.1 8b Instruct leads

Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 31.1 (#220), phi-3-medium 14B: 9.1 (#306)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.1 8b Instructphi-3-medium 14B
GPQA Diamond—27.6%
LMArena Expert1142—
ARC (AI2) Challenge—91.6%
MMLU—78%
OpenBookQA—87.4%
TriviaQA—73.9%

Multilingual Not comparable

Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 30.9 (#260), phi-3-medium 14B: —

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.1 8b Instructphi-3-medium 14B
LMArena Non-English1099—
LMArena Chinese1145—
LMArena Russian1092—

Instruction Following Not comparable

Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 58.6 (#259), phi-3-medium 14B: —

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.1 8b Instructphi-3-medium 14B
LMArena Instruction Following1131—

Long Context Not comparable

Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 35.2 (#241), phi-3-medium 14B: —

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.1 8b Instructphi-3-medium 14B
LMArena Longer Query1162—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 35.5 (#266), phi-3-medium 14B: —

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.1 8b Instructphi-3-medium 14B
LMArena Text1150—
LMArena Creative Writing1129—
LMArena Multi-Turn1108—

Frequently asked questions

Is Granite 3.1 8b Instruct better than phi-3-medium 14B?

Granite 3.1 8b Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 32.4 to 29.7 on the Noometry Index.

Is Granite 3.1 8b Instruct or phi-3-medium 14B better for coding?

phi-3-medium 14B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 36.8 versus 34.5 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Granite 3.1 8b Instruct and phi-3-medium 14B share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Granite 3.1 8b Instruct has 13 scored results on Noometry and phi-3-medium 14B has 13.

Related comparisons

Go deeper