Model comparison
Granite 4.2 30b vs Llama 3.2 3B
Granite 4.2 30b is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.4 to 28.4 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 11 shared benchmarks.
MetaSummary
- They share 11 benchmarks with published results for both. Granite 4.2 30b scores higher in 7 categories and Llama 3.2 3B in 0 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Granite 4.2 30b leads 54.3 to 24.9.
Side by side
| Granite 4.2 30b | Llama 3.2 3B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | IBM | Meta |
| Noometry Index | 41.4 | 28.4 |
| Released | — | 2024-09-24 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | — | 131K |
| Max output | — | 118K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.05 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $0.33 |
| Results tracked | 11 | 18 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Granite 4.2 30b leads
Granite 4.2 30b: 40.4 (#127), Llama 3.2 3B: 27.1 (#314)
| Benchmark | Granite 4.2 30b | Llama 3.2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1394 | 1098 |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 23.4% |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 28.3% |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Granite 4.2 30b: —, Llama 3.2 3B: 19.9 (#135)
| Benchmark | Granite 4.2 30b | Llama 3.2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 21.9% |
| BALROG | — | 10.1% |
Reasoning Granite 4.2 30b leads
Granite 4.2 30b: 26.7 (#114), Llama 3.2 3B: 20.1 (#225)
| Benchmark | Granite 4.2 30b | Llama 3.2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1375 | 1095 |
Math Not comparable
Granite 4.2 30b: —, Llama 3.2 3B: 29.9 (#213)
| Benchmark | Granite 4.2 30b | Llama 3.2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | — | 1126 |
Knowledge Granite 4.2 30b leads
Granite 4.2 30b: 38.5 (#134), Llama 3.2 3B: 29.1 (#232)
| Benchmark | Granite 4.2 30b | Llama 3.2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1405 | 1090 |
Multilingual Granite 4.2 30b leads
Granite 4.2 30b: 47.4 (#146), Llama 3.2 3B: 26.4 (#276)
| Benchmark | Granite 4.2 30b | Llama 3.2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1340 | 1019 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1415 | 1017 |
| LMArena Russian | 1342 | 949 |
| LMArena German | — | 1056 |
Instruction Following Granite 4.2 30b leads
Granite 4.2 30b: 71.3 (#150), Llama 3.2 3B: 56.3 (#270)
| Benchmark | Granite 4.2 30b | Llama 3.2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1346 | 1089 |
Long Context Granite 4.2 30b leads
Granite 4.2 30b: 41.4 (#135), Llama 3.2 3B: 33.4 (#256)
| Benchmark | Granite 4.2 30b | Llama 3.2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1359 | 1101 |
Writing & Preference Granite 4.2 30b leads
Granite 4.2 30b: 54.3 (#147), Llama 3.2 3B: 24.9 (#302)
| Benchmark | Granite 4.2 30b | Llama 3.2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1363 | 1110 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1294 | 1094 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1340 | 1105 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 595 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Granite 4.2 30b better than Llama 3.2 3B?
Granite 4.2 30b is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.4 to 28.4 on the Noometry Index.
Is Granite 4.2 30b or Llama 3.2 3B better for coding?
Granite 4.2 30b scores higher on coding benchmarks: 40.4 versus 27.1 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Granite 4.2 30b and Llama 3.2 3B share?
11 benchmarks have published results for both models. Granite 4.2 30b has 11 scored results on Noometry and Llama 3.2 3B has 18.