Noometry

Model comparison

Grok-2 (Dec 2024) vs Llama 3.2 3B

Grok-2 (Dec 2024) is the stronger model overall, scoring 33.7 to 28.9 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 13 shared benchmarks.

Grok-2 (Dec 2024) xAI

33.7

Rank #239 Confirmed

Llama 3.2 3B Meta

28.9

Rank #321 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 13 benchmarks with published results for both. Grok-2 (Dec 2024) scores higher in 6 categories and Llama 3.2 3B in 2 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Grok-2 (Dec 2024) leads 48.6 to 24.7.
  • Llama 3.2 3B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Grok-2 (Dec 2024)Llama 3.2 3B
ProviderxAIMeta
Noometry Index33.728.9
Released2024-08-132024-09-24
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window—131K
Max output—118K
Input $ / M tokens—$0.05
Output $ / M tokens—$0.33
Results tracked3418

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

Category by category

Coding Grok-2 (Dec 2024) leads

Grok-2 (Dec 2024): 33.3 (#258), Llama 3.2 3B: 27.6 (#319)

BenchmarkGrok-2 (Dec 2024)Llama 3.2 3B
LMArena Coding12871098
WeirdML22.2%—
BigCodeBench Instruct—23.4%
LiveBench Coding46.4%—
BigCodeBench Complete—28.3%

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Grok-2 (Dec 2024): —, Llama 3.2 3B: 20.1 (#143)

BenchmarkGrok-2 (Dec 2024)Llama 3.2 3B
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard—21.9%
BALROG—10.1%

Reasoning Llama 3.2 3B leads

Grok-2 (Dec 2024): 16.9 (#299), Llama 3.2 3B: 21.0 (#228)

BenchmarkGrok-2 (Dec 2024)Llama 3.2 3B
LMArena Hard Prompts12721095
SimpleBench22.7%—
LiveBench Reasoning54.8%—
DTBench65.2%—
LiveBench Data Analysis54.5%—
Epoch Capabilities Index130.48—
LiveBench54.3%—

Math Llama 3.2 3B leads

Grok-2 (Dec 2024): 20.8 (#284), Llama 3.2 3B: 32.4 (#214)

BenchmarkGrok-2 (Dec 2024)Llama 3.2 3B
LMArena Math12831126
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202511.5%—
LiveBench Math54.9%—
MATH Level 563.5%—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)0.7%—

Knowledge Too close to call

Grok-2 (Dec 2024): 29.8 (#233), Llama 3.2 3B: 29.7 (#235)

BenchmarkGrok-2 (Dec 2024)Llama 3.2 3B
LMArena Expert12541090
GPQA Diamond53.8%—
Confabulations20.1%—

Multilingual Grok-2 (Dec 2024) leads

Grok-2 (Dec 2024): 43.1 (#188), Llama 3.2 3B: 26.2 (#281)

BenchmarkGrok-2 (Dec 2024)Llama 3.2 3B
LMArena Non-English12821019
LMArena Chinese12891017
LMArena German12871056
LMArena Russian1286949
LMArena French1318—
LMArena Japanese1244—
LMArena Korean1237—
LMArena Spanish1281—

Instruction Following Grok-2 (Dec 2024) leads

Grok-2 (Dec 2024): 66.9 (#202), Llama 3.2 3B: 56.0 (#275)

BenchmarkGrok-2 (Dec 2024)Llama 3.2 3B
LMArena Instruction Following12701089
LiveBench Instruction Following69.6%—

Long Context Grok-2 (Dec 2024) leads

Grok-2 (Dec 2024): 38.8 (#190), Llama 3.2 3B: 33.4 (#261)

BenchmarkGrok-2 (Dec 2024)Llama 3.2 3B
LMArena Longer Query12761100

Writing & Preference Grok-2 (Dec 2024) leads

Grok-2 (Dec 2024): 48.6 (#198), Llama 3.2 3B: 24.7 (#307)

BenchmarkGrok-2 (Dec 2024)Llama 3.2 3B
LMArena Text13051110
LMArena Creative Writing12841094
LMArena Multi-Turn12901105
Short-Story Creative Writing63.6%—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing—595
LiveBench Language45.6%—

Frequently asked questions

Is Grok-2 (Dec 2024) better than Llama 3.2 3B?

Grok-2 (Dec 2024) is the stronger model overall, scoring 33.7 to 28.9 on the Noometry Index.

Is Grok-2 (Dec 2024) or Llama 3.2 3B better for coding?

Grok-2 (Dec 2024) scores higher on coding benchmarks: 33.3 versus 27.6 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Grok-2 (Dec 2024) and Llama 3.2 3B share?

13 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok-2 (Dec 2024) has 34 scored results on Noometry and Llama 3.2 3B has 18.

Related comparisons

Go deeper