Model comparison
Grok-3 mini vs Llama 3.2 3B
Grok-3 mini is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.2 to 28.9 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 13 shared benchmarks.
MetaSummary
- They share 13 benchmarks with published results for both. Grok-3 mini scores higher in 7 categories and Llama 3.2 3B in 1 category; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Grok-3 mini leads 52.5 to 24.7.
- Llama 3.2 3B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Grok-3 mini | Llama 3.2 3B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | xAI | Meta |
| Noometry Index | 41.2 | 28.9 |
| Released | 2025-04-09 | 2024-09-24 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | — | 131K |
| Max output | — | 118K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.05 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $0.33 |
| Results tracked | 35 | 18 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Grok-3 mini leads
Grok-3 mini: 40.8 (#131), Llama 3.2 3B: 27.6 (#319)
| Benchmark | Grok-3 mini | Llama 3.2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1379 | 1098 |
| Aider Polyglot | 49.3% | — |
| WeirdML | 42.6% | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 23.4% |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 28.3% |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Grok-3 mini: —, Llama 3.2 3B: 20.1 (#143)
| Benchmark | Grok-3 mini | Llama 3.2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 21.9% |
| BALROG | — | 10.1% |
Reasoning Llama 3.2 3B leads
Grok-3 mini: 13.6 (#334), Llama 3.2 3B: 21.0 (#228)
| Benchmark | Grok-3 mini | Llama 3.2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1375 | 1095 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 0.4% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 61.3% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 16.5% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 140.35 | — |
Math Grok-3 mini leads
Grok-3 mini: 42.1 (#85), Llama 3.2 3B: 32.4 (#214)
| Benchmark | Grok-3 mini | Llama 3.2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1386 | 1126 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 77.8% | — |
| Omni-MATH | 31.8% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 90.9% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 5.9% | — |
Knowledge Grok-3 mini leads
Grok-3 mini: 46.4 (#81), Llama 3.2 3B: 29.7 (#235)
| Benchmark | Grok-3 mini | Llama 3.2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1395 | 1090 |
| GPQA Diamond | 76.3% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | 79.9% | — |
| Confabulations | 10.8% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 67.5% | — |
Multilingual Grok-3 mini leads
Grok-3 mini: 48.1 (#145), Llama 3.2 3B: 26.2 (#281)
| Benchmark | Grok-3 mini | Llama 3.2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1352 | 1019 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1387 | 1017 |
| LMArena German | 1349 | 1056 |
| LMArena Russian | 1353 | 949 |
| LMArena French | 1357 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1342 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1335 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1381 | — |
Instruction Following Grok-3 mini leads
Grok-3 mini: 78.5 (#9), Llama 3.2 3B: 56.0 (#275)
| Benchmark | Grok-3 mini | Llama 3.2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1357 | 1089 |
| IFEval | 95.1% | — |
Long Context Grok-3 mini leads
Grok-3 mini: 41.0 (#147), Llama 3.2 3B: 33.4 (#261)
| Benchmark | Grok-3 mini | Llama 3.2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1372 | 1100 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | 66.7% | — |
Writing & Preference Grok-3 mini leads
Grok-3 mini: 52.5 (#169), Llama 3.2 3B: 24.7 (#307)
| Benchmark | Grok-3 mini | Llama 3.2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1370 | 1110 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1342 | 1094 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1355 | 1105 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 73.5% | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 595 |
| WildBench | 65.1% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Grok-3 mini better than Llama 3.2 3B?
Grok-3 mini is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.2 to 28.9 on the Noometry Index.
Is Grok-3 mini or Llama 3.2 3B better for coding?
Grok-3 mini scores higher on coding benchmarks: 40.8 versus 27.6 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Grok-3 mini and Llama 3.2 3B share?
13 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok-3 mini has 35 scored results on Noometry and Llama 3.2 3B has 18.