Model comparison
Llama 3.1-70B vs Llama 3.2 90B
Llama 3.1-70B is the stronger model overall, scoring 29.6 to 27.5 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 6 shared benchmarks.
MetaSummary
- They share 6 benchmarks with published results for both. Llama 3.1-70B scores higher in 2 categories and Llama 3.2 90B in 2 categories; 3 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in agentic & tool use, where Llama 3.2 90B leads 30.0 to 25.1.
Side by side
| Llama 3.1-70B | Llama 3.2 90B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Meta | Meta |
| Noometry Index | 29.6 | 27.5 |
| Released | 2024-07-23 | 2024-09-24 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 128K | — |
| Max output | 4K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.40 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.40 | — |
| Results tracked | 35 | 9 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Not comparable
Llama 3.1-70B: 30.3 (#296), Llama 3.2 90B: —
| Benchmark | Llama 3.1-70B | Llama 3.2 90B |
|---|---|---|
| WeirdML | 9% | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 46.1% | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1260 | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 54.8% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Llama 3.2 90B leads
Llama 3.1-70B: 25.1 (#112), Llama 3.2 90B: 30.0 (#80)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.1-70B | Llama 3.2 90B |
|---|---|---|
| BALROG | 27.9% | 27.3% |
| TheAgentCompany | 6.9% | — |
Reasoning Too close to call
Llama 3.1-70B: 21.6 (#220), Llama 3.2 90B: 21.7 (#217)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.1-70B | Llama 3.2 90B |
|---|---|---|
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 125.92 | 125.5 |
| EnigmaEval | — | 0.4% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1241 | — |
| DTBench | 60% | — |
| LMCA | 14.8% | — |
Math Llama 3.1-70B leads
Llama 3.1-70B: 13.5 (#304), Llama 3.2 90B: 11.1 (#308)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.1-70B | Llama 3.2 90B |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 3.6% | 2.6% |
| MATH Level 5 | 36.7% | 39.4% |
| Omni-MATH | 21% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1252 | — |
Knowledge Llama 3.1-70B leads
Llama 3.1-70B: 24.2 (#269), Llama 3.2 90B: 21.7 (#274)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.1-70B | Llama 3.2 90B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 44.2% | 41% |
| MMLU | 80.1% | 80.3% |
| MMLU-Pro | 65.3% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 42.6% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1209 | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Llama 3.1-70B: —, Llama 3.2 90B: 25.4 (#124)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.1-70B | Llama 3.2 90B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1000 |
| GeoBench | — | 52% |
Multilingual Not comparable
Llama 3.1-70B: 38.8 (#225), Llama 3.2 90B: —
| Benchmark | Llama 3.1-70B | Llama 3.2 90B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1219 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1215 | — |
| LMArena French | 1261 | — |
| LMArena German | 1222 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1132 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1140 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1234 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1253 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Llama 3.1-70B: 65.3 (#223), Llama 3.2 90B: —
| Benchmark | Llama 3.1-70B | Llama 3.2 90B |
|---|---|---|
| IFEval | 82.1% | — |
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1231 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
Llama 3.1-70B: 37.6 (#214), Llama 3.2 90B: —
| Benchmark | Llama 3.1-70B | Llama 3.2 90B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1241 | — |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Llama 3.1-70B: 35.4 (#267), Llama 3.2 90B: —
| Benchmark | Llama 3.1-70B | Llama 3.2 90B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1261 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1232 | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 784 | — |
| WildBench | 75.8% | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1256 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Llama 3.1-70B better than Llama 3.2 90B?
Llama 3.1-70B is the stronger model overall, scoring 29.6 to 27.5 on the Noometry Index.
How many benchmarks do Llama 3.1-70B and Llama 3.2 90B share?
6 benchmarks have published results for both models. Llama 3.1-70B has 35 scored results on Noometry and Llama 3.2 90B has 9.