Model comparison
Grok 4.1 Fast vs Llama 3.2 3B
Grok 4.1 Fast is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.4 to 28.9 on the Noometry Index. Llama 3.2 3B costs 2.3× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Grok 4.1 Fast's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 15 shared benchmarks.
MetaSummary
- They share 15 benchmarks with published results for both. Grok 4.1 Fast scores higher in 8 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 4.1 Fast leads 57.2 to 24.7.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard: 69.6% for Grok 4.1 Fast and 21.9% for Llama 3.2 3B.
- Llama 3.2 3B is cheaper at $0.05 / $0.33 per million input/output tokens, against $0.20 / $0.50 for Grok 4.1 Fast.
- Llama 3.2 3B accepts more context: 131K tokens versus 128K.
- Llama 3.2 3B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Grok 4.1 Fast | Llama 3.2 3B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | xAI | Meta |
| Noometry Index | 41.4 | 28.9 |
| Released | 2025-06-27 | 2024-09-24 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 128K | 131K |
| Max output | 30K | 118K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.20 | $0.05 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.50 | $0.33 |
| Results tracked | 32 | 18 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Grok 4.1 Fast leads
Grok 4.1 Fast: 34.1 (#245), Llama 3.2 3B: 27.6 (#319)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 Fast | Llama 3.2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1411 | 1098 |
| LMArena WebDev | 1242 | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 23.4% |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 28.3% |
| ALE-Bench | 394.93 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Grok 4.1 Fast leads
Grok 4.1 Fast: 36.3 (#39), Llama 3.2 3B: 20.1 (#143)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 Fast | Llama 3.2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 69.6% | 21.9% |
| τ²-bench Banking | 13.1% | — |
| BALROG | — | 10.1% |
| LMArena Search | 1171 | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 1,107 | — |
Reasoning Grok 4.1 Fast leads
Grok 4.1 Fast: 43.4 (#49), Llama 3.2 3B: 21.0 (#228)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 Fast | Llama 3.2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1407 | 1095 |
| SimpleBench | 56% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 87.4% | — |
| DTBench | 87.7% | — |
| ForecastBench | 61 | — |
Math Too close to call
Grok 4.1 Fast: 31.9 (#221), Llama 3.2 3B: 32.4 (#214)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 Fast | Llama 3.2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1408 | 1126 |
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | 60.9% | — |
| ProofBench | 4% | — |
Knowledge Grok 4.1 Fast leads
Grok 4.1 Fast: 33.1 (#207), Llama 3.2 3B: 29.7 (#235)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 Fast | Llama 3.2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1399 | 1090 |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 17.8% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Grok 4.1 Fast: 37.0 (#76), Llama 3.2 3B: —
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 Fast | Llama 3.2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1201 | — |
Multilingual Grok 4.1 Fast leads
Grok 4.1 Fast: 51.0 (#114), Llama 3.2 3B: 26.2 (#281)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 Fast | Llama 3.2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1391 | 1019 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1441 | 1017 |
| LMArena German | 1404 | 1056 |
| LMArena Russian | 1387 | 949 |
| LMArena French | 1415 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1349 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1361 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1413 | — |
Instruction Following Grok 4.1 Fast leads
Grok 4.1 Fast: 72.7 (#133), Llama 3.2 3B: 56.0 (#275)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 Fast | Llama 3.2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1376 | 1089 |
Long Context Grok 4.1 Fast leads
Grok 4.1 Fast: 42.4 (#126), Llama 3.2 3B: 33.4 (#261)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 Fast | Llama 3.2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1390 | 1100 |
Writing & Preference Grok 4.1 Fast leads
Grok 4.1 Fast: 57.2 (#131), Llama 3.2 3B: 24.7 (#307)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 Fast | Llama 3.2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1408 | 1110 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1394 | 1094 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1327 | 595 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1389 | 1105 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Grok 4.1 Fast better than Llama 3.2 3B?
Grok 4.1 Fast is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.4 to 28.9 on the Noometry Index. Llama 3.2 3B costs 2.3× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Grok 4.1 Fast's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, Grok 4.1 Fast or Llama 3.2 3B?
Llama 3.2 3B is cheaper. It lists at $0.05 per million input tokens and $0.33 per million output tokens; Grok 4.1 Fast lists at $0.20 and $0.50.
Is Grok 4.1 Fast or Llama 3.2 3B better for coding?
Grok 4.1 Fast scores higher on coding benchmarks: 34.1 versus 27.6 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Llama 3.2 3B does, with 131K tokens against 128K.
How many benchmarks do Grok 4.1 Fast and Llama 3.2 3B share?
15 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok 4.1 Fast has 32 scored results on Noometry and Llama 3.2 3B has 18.