Model comparison
Granite 4.0 Micro vs Llama 3.2 1B
Granite 4.0 Micro is the stronger model overall, scoring 28.8 to 19.9 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 3 shared benchmarks.
MetaSummary
- They share 3 benchmarks with published results for both. Granite 4.0 Micro scores higher in 5 categories and Llama 3.2 1B in 0 categories; 5 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Granite 4.0 Micro leads 46.7 to 21.4.
- Granite 4.0 Micro is cheaper at $0.017 / $0.11 per million input/output tokens, against $0.027 / $0.20 for Llama 3.2 1B.
- Granite 4.0 Micro accepts more context: 131K tokens versus 60K.
Side by side
| Granite 4.0 Micro | Llama 3.2 1B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | IBM | Meta |
| Noometry Index | 28.8 | 19.9 |
| Released | 2025-10-02 | 2024-09-24 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 131K | 60K |
| Max output | 118K | 54K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.017 | $0.027 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.11 | $0.20 |
| Results tracked | 8 | 22 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Not comparable
Granite 4.0 Micro: —, Llama 3.2 1B: 20.6 (#333)
| Benchmark | Granite 4.0 Micro | Llama 3.2 1B |
|---|---|---|
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 8.2% |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1071 |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 11.3% |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Granite 4.0 Micro: —, Llama 3.2 1B: 14.5 (#142)
| Benchmark | Granite 4.0 Micro | Llama 3.2 1B |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 10.8% |
| BALROG | — | 6.6% |
Reasoning Granite 4.0 Micro leads
Granite 4.0 Micro: 18.5 (#261), Llama 3.2 1B: 15.6 (#304)
| Benchmark | Granite 4.0 Micro | Llama 3.2 1B |
|---|---|---|
| Chess Puzzles | 0% | 0% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1044 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 101.95 |
Math Granite 4.0 Micro leads
Granite 4.0 Micro: 11.2 (#301), Llama 3.2 1B: 9.7 (#308)
| Benchmark | Granite 4.0 Micro | Llama 3.2 1B |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 2.8% | 0.6% |
| Omni-MATH | 20.9% | — |
| LMArena Math | — | 1086 |
Knowledge Granite 4.0 Micro leads
Granite 4.0 Micro: 9.9 (#299), Llama 3.2 1B: 7.2 (#307)
| Benchmark | Granite 4.0 Micro | Llama 3.2 1B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 28.3% | 23.9% |
| MMLU-Pro | 39.5% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 30.7% | — |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1007 |
Multilingual Not comparable
Granite 4.0 Micro: —, Llama 3.2 1B: 23.9 (#287)
| Benchmark | Granite 4.0 Micro | Llama 3.2 1B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 973 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 958 |
| LMArena German | — | 1014 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 941 |
Instruction Following Granite 4.0 Micro leads
Granite 4.0 Micro: 70.0 (#164), Llama 3.2 1B: 52.6 (#285)
| Benchmark | Granite 4.0 Micro | Llama 3.2 1B |
|---|---|---|
| IFEval | 84.9% | — |
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1031 |
Long Context Not comparable
Granite 4.0 Micro: —, Llama 3.2 1B: 31.9 (#269)
| Benchmark | Granite 4.0 Micro | Llama 3.2 1B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1050 |
Writing & Preference Granite 4.0 Micro leads
Granite 4.0 Micro: 46.7 (#212), Llama 3.2 1B: 21.4 (#305)
| Benchmark | Granite 4.0 Micro | Llama 3.2 1B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1055 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1033 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 200 |
| WildBench | 67% | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1030 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Granite 4.0 Micro better than Llama 3.2 1B?
Granite 4.0 Micro is the stronger model overall, scoring 28.8 to 19.9 on the Noometry Index.
Which is cheaper, Granite 4.0 Micro or Llama 3.2 1B?
Granite 4.0 Micro is cheaper. It lists at $0.017 per million input tokens and $0.11 per million output tokens; Llama 3.2 1B lists at $0.027 and $0.20.
Which has the bigger context window?
Granite 4.0 Micro does, with 131K tokens against 60K.
How many benchmarks do Granite 4.0 Micro and Llama 3.2 1B share?
3 benchmarks have published results for both models. Granite 4.0 Micro has 8 scored results on Noometry and Llama 3.2 1B has 22.