Model comparison

Kimi K2 (Jul 2025) vs Llama 3.2 3B

Kimi K2 (Jul 2025) is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.2 to 28.9 on the Noometry Index. Llama 3.2 3B costs 8.4× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Kimi K2 (Jul 2025)'s lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 15 shared benchmarks.

Kimi K2 (Jul 2025) Moonshot AI

41.2

Rank #140 Confirmed

Llama 3.2 3B Meta

28.9

Rank #321 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 15 benchmarks with published results for both. Kimi K2 (Jul 2025) 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 Kimi K2 (Jul 2025) leads 62.3 to 24.7.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard: 59.1% for Kimi K2 (Jul 2025) 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 $0.57 / $2.30 for Kimi K2 (Jul 2025).
  • Kimi K2 (Jul 2025) accepts more context: 262K tokens versus 131K.

Side by side

Kimi K2 (Jul 2025) and Llama 3.2 3B specifications
Kimi K2 (Jul 2025)Llama 3.2 3B
ProviderMoonshot AIMeta
Noometry Index41.228.9
Released2025-07-122024-09-24
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window262K131K
Max output262K118K
Input $ / M tokens$0.57$0.05
Output $ / M tokens$2.30$0.33
Results tracked4218

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

Category by category

Coding Kimi K2 (Jul 2025) leads

Kimi K2 (Jul 2025): 42.4 (#102), Llama 3.2 3B: 27.6 (#319)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkKimi K2 (Jul 2025)Llama 3.2 3B
LMArena Coding13991098
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)63.4%—
Aider Polyglot59.1%—
GSO4.9%—
WeirdML42.8%—
BigCodeBench Instruct—23.4%
BigCodeBench Complete—28.3%
ALE-Bench597.5—

Agentic & Tool Use Kimi K2 (Jul 2025) leads

Kimi K2 (Jul 2025): 32.4 (#64), Llama 3.2 3B: 20.1 (#143)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkKimi K2 (Jul 2025)Llama 3.2 3B
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard59.1%21.9%
Terminal-Bench35.7%—
BALROG—10.1%
METR Time Horizons59.2%—

Reasoning Kimi K2 (Jul 2025) leads

Kimi K2 (Jul 2025): 23.3 (#179), Llama 3.2 3B: 21.0 (#228)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkKimi K2 (Jul 2025)Llama 3.2 3B
LMArena Hard Prompts13841095
SimpleBench26.3%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark64.4%—
Epoch Capabilities Index146.01—
ForecastBench60.2—

Math Kimi K2 (Jul 2025) leads

Kimi K2 (Jul 2025): 42.7 (#83), Llama 3.2 3B: 32.4 (#214)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkKimi K2 (Jul 2025)Llama 3.2 3B
LMArena Math13971126
Omni-MATH65.4%—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)21.4%—
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)0%—

Knowledge Kimi K2 (Jul 2025) leads

Kimi K2 (Jul 2025): 37.3 (#157), Llama 3.2 3B: 29.7 (#235)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkKimi K2 (Jul 2025)Llama 3.2 3B
LMArena Expert13651090
MMLU-Pro81.9%—
Confabulations20.4%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate17.9%—
GPQA (HELM)65.3%—

Multilingual Kimi K2 (Jul 2025) leads

Kimi K2 (Jul 2025): 49.6 (#130), Llama 3.2 3B: 26.2 (#281)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkKimi K2 (Jul 2025)Llama 3.2 3B
LMArena Non-English13721019
LMArena Chinese14151017
LMArena German13871056
LMArena Russian1385949
LMArena French1379—
LMArena Japanese1349—
LMArena Korean1325—
LMArena Spanish1386—

Instruction Following Kimi K2 (Jul 2025) leads

Kimi K2 (Jul 2025): 71.1 (#156), Llama 3.2 3B: 56.0 (#275)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkKimi K2 (Jul 2025)Llama 3.2 3B
LMArena Instruction Following13481089
IFEval85%—

Long Context Kimi K2 (Jul 2025) leads

Kimi K2 (Jul 2025): 41.2 (#145), Llama 3.2 3B: 33.4 (#261)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkKimi K2 (Jul 2025)Llama 3.2 3B
LMArena Longer Query13531100
Fiction.LiveBench66.7%—
CL-bench17.6%—

Writing & Preference Kimi K2 (Jul 2025) leads

Kimi K2 (Jul 2025): 62.3 (#78), Llama 3.2 3B: 24.7 (#307)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkKimi K2 (Jul 2025)Llama 3.2 3B
LMArena Text13801110
LMArena Creative Writing13501094
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1666595
LMArena Multi-Turn13711105
Short-Story Creative Writing85.6%—
WildBench86.2%—

Frequently asked questions

Is Kimi K2 (Jul 2025) better than Llama 3.2 3B?

Kimi K2 (Jul 2025) is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.2 to 28.9 on the Noometry Index. Llama 3.2 3B costs 8.4× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Kimi K2 (Jul 2025)'s lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, Kimi K2 (Jul 2025) 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; Kimi K2 (Jul 2025) lists at $0.57 and $2.30.

Is Kimi K2 (Jul 2025) or Llama 3.2 3B better for coding?

Kimi K2 (Jul 2025) scores higher on coding benchmarks: 42.4 versus 27.6 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Kimi K2 (Jul 2025) does, with 262K tokens against 131K.

How many benchmarks do Kimi K2 (Jul 2025) and Llama 3.2 3B share?

15 benchmarks have published results for both models. Kimi K2 (Jul 2025) has 42 scored results on Noometry and Llama 3.2 3B has 18.

Related comparisons

Go deeper