Model comparison

Granite 4.2 8B vs Llama 3.2 3B

Granite 4.2 8B is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.0 to 28.4 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified October 10, 2026. 11 shared benchmarks.

Granite 4.2 8B IBM

40.0

Rank #143 Confirmed

Llama 3.2 3B

Summary

They share 11 benchmarks with published results for both. Granite 4.2 8B 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 8B leads 49.8 to 24.9.
Granite 4.2 8B is cheaper at $0.06 / $0.25 per million input/output tokens, against $0.05 / $0.33 for Llama 3.2 3B.

Side by side

Granite 4.2 8B and Llama 3.2 3B specifications
	Granite 4.2 8B	Llama 3.2 3B
Provider	IBM	Meta
Noometry Index	40.0	28.4
Released	—	2024-09-24
Weights	Open	Open
Context window	131K	131K
Max output	118K	118K
Input $ / M tokens	$0.06	$0.05
Output $ / M tokens	$0.25	$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 8B leads

Granite 4.2 8B: 39.9 (#138), Llama 3.2 3B: 27.1 (#314)

Coding benchmarks
Benchmark	Granite 4.2 8B	Llama 3.2 3B
LMArena Coding	1379	1098
BigCodeBench Instruct	—	23.4%
BigCodeBench Complete	—	28.3%

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Granite 4.2 8B: —, Llama 3.2 3B: 19.9 (#135)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
Benchmark	Granite 4.2 8B	Llama 3.2 3B
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard	—	21.9%
BALROG	—	10.1%

Reasoning Granite 4.2 8B leads

Granite 4.2 8B: 25.5 (#130), Llama 3.2 3B: 20.1 (#225)

Reasoning benchmarks
Benchmark	Granite 4.2 8B	Llama 3.2 3B
LMArena Hard Prompts	1327	1095

Math Not comparable

Granite 4.2 8B: —, Llama 3.2 3B: 29.9 (#213)

Math benchmarks
Benchmark	Granite 4.2 8B	Llama 3.2 3B
LMArena Math	—	1126

Knowledge Granite 4.2 8B leads

Granite 4.2 8B: 37.7 (#144), Llama 3.2 3B: 29.1 (#232)

Knowledge benchmarks
Benchmark	Granite 4.2 8B	Llama 3.2 3B
LMArena Expert	1380	1090

Multilingual Granite 4.2 8B leads

Granite 4.2 8B: 44.5 (#173), Llama 3.2 3B: 26.4 (#276)

Multilingual benchmarks
Benchmark	Granite 4.2 8B	Llama 3.2 3B
LMArena Non-English	1299	1019
LMArena Chinese	1361	1017
LMArena Russian	1283	949
LMArena German	—	1056

Instruction Following Granite 4.2 8B leads

Granite 4.2 8B: 68.7 (#183), Llama 3.2 3B: 56.3 (#270)

Instruction Following benchmarks
Benchmark	Granite 4.2 8B	Llama 3.2 3B
LMArena Instruction Following	1298	1089

Long Context Granite 4.2 8B leads

Granite 4.2 8B: 40.2 (#154), Llama 3.2 3B: 33.4 (#256)

Long Context benchmarks
Benchmark	Granite 4.2 8B	Llama 3.2 3B
LMArena Longer Query	1323	1101

Writing & Preference Granite 4.2 8B leads

Granite 4.2 8B: 49.8 (#183), Llama 3.2 3B: 24.9 (#302)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
Benchmark	Granite 4.2 8B	Llama 3.2 3B
LMArena Text	1319	1110
LMArena Creative Writing	1238	1094
LMArena Multi-Turn	1299	1105
EQ-Bench Creative Writing	—	595

Frequently asked questions

Is Granite 4.2 8B better than Llama 3.2 3B?

Granite 4.2 8B is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.0 to 28.4 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, Granite 4.2 8B or Llama 3.2 3B?

Granite 4.2 8B is cheaper. It lists at $0.06 per million input tokens and $0.25 per million output tokens; Llama 3.2 3B lists at $0.05 and $0.33.

Is Granite 4.2 8B or Llama 3.2 3B better for coding?

Granite 4.2 8B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 39.9 versus 27.1 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Both accept 131K tokens.

How many benchmarks do Granite 4.2 8B and Llama 3.2 3B share?

11 benchmarks have published results for both models. Granite 4.2 8B has 11 scored results on Noometry and Llama 3.2 3B has 18.