Model comparison

Grok Build 0.1 vs Llama 3.2 3B

Grok Build 0.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 36.4 to 28.9 on the Noometry Index. Llama 3.2 3B costs 10× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Grok Build 0.1's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified October 12, 2026. 0 shared benchmarks.

Grok Build 0.1 xAI

36.4

Rank #216 Reported

Llama 3.2 3B

Summary

The widest gap is in coding, where Grok Build 0.1 leads 43.1 to 27.6.
Llama 3.2 3B is cheaper at $0.05 / $0.33 per million input/output tokens, against $1 / $2 for Grok Build 0.1.
Grok Build 0.1 accepts more context: 256K tokens versus 131K.
Llama 3.2 3B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Grok Build 0.1 and Llama 3.2 3B specifications
	Grok Build 0.1	Llama 3.2 3B
Provider	xAI	Meta
Noometry Index	36.4	28.9
Released	2026-04-16	2024-09-24
Weights	Proprietary	Open
Context window	256K	131K
Max output	256K	118K
Input $ / M tokens	$1	$0.05
Output $ / M tokens	$2	$0.33
Results tracked	3	18

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

Category by category

Coding Grok Build 0.1 leads

Grok Build 0.1: 43.1 (#91), Llama 3.2 3B: 27.6 (#319)

Coding benchmarks
Benchmark	Grok Build 0.1	Llama 3.2 3B
SciCode	50.2%	—
BigCodeBench Instruct	—	23.4%
LMArena Coding	—	1098
BigCodeBench Complete	—	28.3%

Agentic & Tool Use Grok Build 0.1 leads

Grok Build 0.1: 22.7 (#129), Llama 3.2 3B: 20.1 (#143)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
Benchmark	Grok Build 0.1	Llama 3.2 3B
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard	—	21.9%
BALROG	—	10.1%
GBAEval	2.4%	—

Reasoning Grok Build 0.1 leads

Grok Build 0.1: 32.2 (#77), Llama 3.2 3B: 21.0 (#228)

Reasoning benchmarks
Benchmark	Grok Build 0.1	Llama 3.2 3B
CritPt	9.1%	—
LMArena Hard Prompts	—	1095

Math Not comparable

Grok Build 0.1: —, Llama 3.2 3B: 32.4 (#214)

Math benchmarks
Benchmark	Grok Build 0.1	Llama 3.2 3B
LMArena Math	—	1126

Knowledge Not comparable

Grok Build 0.1: —, Llama 3.2 3B: 29.7 (#235)

Knowledge benchmarks
Benchmark	Grok Build 0.1	Llama 3.2 3B
LMArena Expert	—	1090

Multilingual Not comparable

Grok Build 0.1: —, Llama 3.2 3B: 26.2 (#281)

Multilingual benchmarks
Benchmark	Grok Build 0.1	Llama 3.2 3B
LMArena Non-English	—	1019
LMArena Chinese	—	1017
LMArena German	—	1056
LMArena Russian	—	949

Instruction Following Not comparable

Grok Build 0.1: —, Llama 3.2 3B: 56.0 (#275)

Instruction Following benchmarks
Benchmark	Grok Build 0.1	Llama 3.2 3B
LMArena Instruction Following	—	1089

Long Context Not comparable

Grok Build 0.1: —, Llama 3.2 3B: 33.4 (#261)

Long Context benchmarks
Benchmark	Grok Build 0.1	Llama 3.2 3B
LMArena Longer Query	—	1100

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Grok Build 0.1: —, Llama 3.2 3B: 24.7 (#307)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
Benchmark	Grok Build 0.1	Llama 3.2 3B
LMArena Text	—	1110
LMArena Creative Writing	—	1094
EQ-Bench Creative Writing	—	595
LMArena Multi-Turn	—	1105

Frequently asked questions

Is Grok Build 0.1 better than Llama 3.2 3B?

Which is cheaper, Grok Build 0.1 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 Build 0.1 lists at $1 and $2.

Is Grok Build 0.1 or Llama 3.2 3B better for coding?

Grok Build 0.1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 43.1 versus 27.6 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Grok Build 0.1 does, with 256K tokens against 131K.

How many benchmarks do Grok Build 0.1 and Llama 3.2 3B share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok Build 0.1 has 3 scored results on Noometry and Llama 3.2 3B has 18.