Model comparison

Llama 3.1-8B vs Phi-3.5-mini

Llama 3.1-8B has enough public results to be ranked (#352); Phi-3.5-mini does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.

Last verified . 5 shared benchmarks.

Llama 3.1-8B Meta

23.0

Rank #352 Confirmed

Phi-3.5-mini Microsoft

36.9

Unranked Sparse

Summary

  • They share 5 benchmarks with published results for both. Llama 3.1-8B scores higher in 0 categories and Phi-3.5-mini in 1 category; one gap is clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in coding, where Phi-3.5-mini leads 34.6 to 20.2.

Side by side

Llama 3.1-8B and Phi-3.5-mini specifications
Llama 3.1-8BPhi-3.5-mini
ProviderMetaMicrosoft
Noometry Index23.036.9
Released2024-07-232024-08-16
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window128K—
Max output4K—
Input $ / M tokens$0.05—
Output $ / M tokens$0.08—
Results tracked435

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

Category by category

Coding Phi-3.5-mini leads

Llama 3.1-8B: 20.2 (#340), Phi-3.5-mini: 34.6 (#232)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3.1-8BPhi-3.5-mini
BigCodeBench Instruct32.8%32.8%
BigCodeBench Complete40.5%38.5%
SciCode13.2%—
WeirdML1.7%—
LMArena Coding1195—
HumanEval+62.8%—
MBPP+55.6%—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Llama 3.1-8B: 22.5 (#131), Phi-3.5-mini: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3.1-8BPhi-3.5-mini
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard25.8%—
BALROG15.1%—

Reasoning Not comparable

Llama 3.1-8B: 14.9 (#321), Phi-3.5-mini: —

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3.1-8BPhi-3.5-mini
PIQA81.2%81%
CritPt0%—
Chess Puzzles0%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1175—
DTBench50.9%—
LMCA5.4%—
Epoch Capabilities Index116.57—

Math Not comparable

Llama 3.1-8B: 10.2 (#317), Phi-3.5-mini: —

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3.1-8BPhi-3.5-mini
GSM8K82.4%86.2%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-20251.7%—
Omni-MATH13.7%—
LMArena Math1179—
MATH Level 522.9%—

Knowledge Not comparable

Llama 3.1-8B: 8.0 (#307), Phi-3.5-mini: —

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3.1-8BPhi-3.5-mini
BoolQ82.8%78%
GPQA Diamond27%—
MMLU-Pro40.6%—
GPQA (HELM)24.7%—
LMArena Expert1144—
MMLU56.1%—

Multilingual Not comparable

Llama 3.1-8B: 34.0 (#249), Phi-3.5-mini: —

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3.1-8BPhi-3.5-mini
LMArena Non-English1148—
LMArena Chinese1151—
LMArena French1177—
LMArena German1144—
LMArena Japanese1061—
LMArena Korean1053—
LMArena Russian1158—
LMArena Spanish1169—

Instruction Following Not comparable

Llama 3.1-8B: 58.9 (#258), Phi-3.5-mini: —

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3.1-8BPhi-3.5-mini
IFEval74.3%—
LMArena Instruction Following1159—

Long Context Not comparable

Llama 3.1-8B: 35.8 (#238), Phi-3.5-mini: —

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3.1-8BPhi-3.5-mini
LMArena Longer Query1182—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Llama 3.1-8B: 29.7 (#290), Phi-3.5-mini: —

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3.1-8BPhi-3.5-mini
LMArena Text1187—
LMArena Creative Writing1154—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing713—
WildBench68.7%—
LMArena Multi-Turn1172—

Frequently asked questions

Is Llama 3.1-8B better than Phi-3.5-mini?

Llama 3.1-8B has enough public results to be ranked (#352); Phi-3.5-mini does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.

Is Llama 3.1-8B or Phi-3.5-mini better for coding?

Phi-3.5-mini scores higher on coding benchmarks: 34.6 versus 20.2 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Llama 3.1-8B and Phi-3.5-mini share?

5 benchmarks have published results for both models. Llama 3.1-8B has 43 scored results on Noometry and Phi-3.5-mini has 5.

Related comparisons

Go deeper