Model comparison
Grok 4.1 vs Llama 3.2 3B
Grok 4.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.5 to 28.9 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 13 shared benchmarks.
MetaSummary
- They share 13 benchmarks with published results for both. Grok 4.1 scores higher in 9 categories and Llama 3.2 3B in 0 categories; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Grok 4.1 leads 62.4 to 24.7.
- Llama 3.2 3B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Grok 4.1 | Llama 3.2 3B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | xAI | Meta |
| Noometry Index | 41.5 | 28.9 |
| Released | 2025-11-17 | 2024-09-24 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | — | 131K |
| Max output | — | 118K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.05 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $0.33 |
| Results tracked | 19 | 18 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Grok 4.1 leads
Grok 4.1: 33.7 (#253), Llama 3.2 3B: 27.6 (#319)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | Llama 3.2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1445 | 1098 |
| LMArena WebDev | 1214 | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 23.4% |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 28.3% |
Agentic & Tool Use Grok 4.1 leads
Grok 4.1: 34.1 (#49), Llama 3.2 3B: 20.1 (#143)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | Llama 3.2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 21.9% |
| Cybench | 39% | — |
| BALROG | — | 10.1% |
Reasoning Grok 4.1 leads
Grok 4.1: 29.5 (#91), Llama 3.2 3B: 21.0 (#228)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | Llama 3.2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1435 | 1095 |
Math Grok 4.1 leads
Grok 4.1: 38.9 (#120), Llama 3.2 3B: 32.4 (#214)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | Llama 3.2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1422 | 1126 |
Knowledge Grok 4.1 leads
Grok 4.1: 39.5 (#133), Llama 3.2 3B: 29.7 (#235)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | Llama 3.2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1417 | 1090 |
Multilingual Grok 4.1 leads
Grok 4.1: 53.4 (#68), Llama 3.2 3B: 26.2 (#281)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | Llama 3.2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1425 | 1019 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1465 | 1017 |
| LMArena German | 1446 | 1056 |
| LMArena Russian | 1434 | 949 |
| LMArena French | 1448 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1397 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1407 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1438 | — |
Instruction Following Grok 4.1 leads
Grok 4.1: 73.8 (#111), Llama 3.2 3B: 56.0 (#275)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | Llama 3.2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1400 | 1089 |
Long Context Grok 4.1 leads
Grok 4.1: 43.2 (#100), Llama 3.2 3B: 33.4 (#261)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | Llama 3.2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1416 | 1100 |
Writing & Preference Grok 4.1 leads
Grok 4.1: 62.4 (#75), Llama 3.2 3B: 24.7 (#307)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | Llama 3.2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1437 | 1110 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1411 | 1094 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1437 | 1105 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 595 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Grok 4.1 better than Llama 3.2 3B?
Grok 4.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.5 to 28.9 on the Noometry Index.
Is Grok 4.1 or Llama 3.2 3B better for coding?
Grok 4.1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 33.7 versus 27.6 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Grok 4.1 and Llama 3.2 3B share?
13 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok 4.1 has 19 scored results on Noometry and Llama 3.2 3B has 18.