Model comparison
Grok 4 Fast vs Llama 3.2 1B
Grok 4 Fast is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.4 to 20.1 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 14 shared benchmarks.
MetaSummary
- They share 14 benchmarks with published results for both. Grok 4 Fast scores higher in 9 categories and Llama 3.2 1B in 0 categories; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Grok 4 Fast leads 60.0 to 21.3.
- Llama 3.2 1B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Grok 4 Fast | Llama 3.2 1B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | xAI | Meta |
| Noometry Index | 39.4 | 20.1 |
| Released | 2025-09-19 | 2024-09-24 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | — | 60K |
| Max output | — | 54K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.027 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $0.20 |
| Results tracked | 30 | 22 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Grok 4 Fast leads
Grok 4 Fast: 32.5 (#271), Llama 3.2 1B: 21.1 (#338)
| Benchmark | Grok 4 Fast | Llama 3.2 1B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1429 | 1070 |
| LMArena WebDev | 1159 | — |
| WeirdML | 42.9% | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 8.2% |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 11.3% |
Agentic & Tool Use Grok 4 Fast leads
Grok 4 Fast: 29.5 (#86), Llama 3.2 1B: 14.6 (#150)
| Benchmark | Grok 4 Fast | Llama 3.2 1B |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 10.8% |
| τ²-bench Banking | 15.7% | — |
| Cybench | 30% | — |
| BALROG | — | 6.6% |
| LMArena Search | 1171 | — |
Reasoning Grok 4 Fast leads
Grok 4 Fast: 22.2 (#201), Llama 3.2 1B: 16.2 (#308)
| Benchmark | Grok 4 Fast | Llama 3.2 1B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1412 | 1044 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 144.2 | 101.99 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 5.3% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 66.1% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 48.5% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 0% |
| DTBench | 82.7% | — |
| ForecastBench | 60.5 | — |
Math Grok 4 Fast leads
Grok 4 Fast: 38.9 (#123), Llama 3.2 1B: 10.4 (#313)
| Benchmark | Grok 4 Fast | Llama 3.2 1B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1419 | 1086 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 0.6% |
Knowledge Grok 4 Fast leads
Grok 4 Fast: 32.0 (#214), Llama 3.2 1B: 7.2 (#312)
| Benchmark | Grok 4 Fast | Llama 3.2 1B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1411 | 1007 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 23.9% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 19.7% | — |
Multilingual Grok 4 Fast leads
Grok 4 Fast: 51.3 (#111), Llama 3.2 1B: 23.8 (#292)
| Benchmark | Grok 4 Fast | Llama 3.2 1B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1396 | 973 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1457 | 959 |
| LMArena German | 1383 | 1014 |
| LMArena Russian | 1389 | 941 |
| LMArena French | 1431 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1352 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1357 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1415 | — |
Instruction Following Grok 4 Fast leads
Grok 4 Fast: 73.2 (#121), Llama 3.2 1B: 52.4 (#290)
| Benchmark | Grok 4 Fast | Llama 3.2 1B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1387 | 1031 |
Long Context Grok 4 Fast leads
Grok 4 Fast: 63.2 (#3), Llama 3.2 1B: 31.9 (#274)
| Benchmark | Grok 4 Fast | Llama 3.2 1B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1415 | 1050 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | 94.4% | — |
Writing & Preference Grok 4 Fast leads
Grok 4 Fast: 60.0 (#102), Llama 3.2 1B: 21.3 (#310)
| Benchmark | Grok 4 Fast | Llama 3.2 1B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1407 | 1055 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1387 | 1033 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1414 | 1030 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 200 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Grok 4 Fast better than Llama 3.2 1B?
Grok 4 Fast is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.4 to 20.1 on the Noometry Index.
Is Grok 4 Fast or Llama 3.2 1B better for coding?
Grok 4 Fast scores higher on coding benchmarks: 32.5 versus 21.1 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Grok 4 Fast and Llama 3.2 1B share?
14 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok 4 Fast has 30 scored results on Noometry and Llama 3.2 1B has 22.