Model comparison
Llama 3.2 1B vs Mixtral 8x22B
Mixtral 8x22B is the stronger model overall, scoring 27.1 to 20.1 on the Noometry Index. Llama 3.2 1B costs 43× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Mixtral 8x22B's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 17 shared benchmarks.
Meta
Mistral AISummary
- They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. Llama 3.2 1B scores higher in 0 categories and Mixtral 8x22B in 9 categories; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Mixtral 8x22B leads 36.9 to 21.3.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is BigCodeBench Complete: 11.3% for Llama 3.2 1B and 50.2% for Mixtral 8x22B.
- Llama 3.2 1B is cheaper at $0.027 / $0.20 per million input/output tokens, against $2 / $6 for Mixtral 8x22B.
- Mixtral 8x22B accepts more context: 64K tokens versus 60K.
Side by side
| Llama 3.2 1B | Mixtral 8x22B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Meta | Mistral AI |
| Noometry Index | 20.1 | 27.1 |
| Released | 2024-09-24 | 2024-04-17 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 60K | 64K |
| Max output | 54K | 64K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.027 | $2 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.20 | $6 |
| Results tracked | 22 | 34 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Mixtral 8x22B leads
Llama 3.2 1B: 21.1 (#338), Mixtral 8x22B: 24.2 (#329)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | Mixtral 8x22B |
|---|---|---|
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 8.2% | 40.6% |
| LMArena Coding | 1070 | 1166 |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 11.3% | 50.2% |
| WeirdML | — | 3.2% |
| HumanEval+ | — | 72% |
| MBPP+ | — | 64.3% |
Agentic & Tool Use Mixtral 8x22B leads
Llama 3.2 1B: 14.6 (#150), Mixtral 8x22B: 23.1 (#127)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | Mixtral 8x22B |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 10.8% | — |
| Cybench | — | 7.5% |
| BALROG | 6.6% | — |
Reasoning Mixtral 8x22B leads
Llama 3.2 1B: 16.2 (#308), Mixtral 8x22B: 19.9 (#248)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | Mixtral 8x22B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1044 | 1150 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 101.99 | 122.03 |
| Chess Puzzles | 0% | — |
| DTBench | — | 55.1% |
| ForecastBench | — | 56.3 |
Math Mixtral 8x22B leads
Llama 3.2 1B: 10.4 (#313), Mixtral 8x22B: 22.9 (#275)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | Mixtral 8x22B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1086 | 1184 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 0.6% | — |
| Omni-MATH | — | 16.3% |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 24.2% |
Knowledge Mixtral 8x22B leads
Llama 3.2 1B: 7.2 (#312), Mixtral 8x22B: 15.1 (#293)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | Mixtral 8x22B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 23.9% | 34.1% |
| LMArena Expert | 1007 | 1113 |
| MMLU-Pro | — | 46% |
| GPQA (HELM) | — | 33.4% |
| MMLU | — | 77.8% |
Multilingual Mixtral 8x22B leads
Llama 3.2 1B: 23.8 (#292), Mixtral 8x22B: 32.8 (#255)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | Mixtral 8x22B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 973 | 1128 |
| LMArena Chinese | 959 | 1116 |
| LMArena German | 1014 | 1141 |
| LMArena Russian | 941 | 1158 |
| LMArena French | — | 1166 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1037 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1057 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1151 |
Instruction Following Mixtral 8x22B leads
Llama 3.2 1B: 52.4 (#290), Mixtral 8x22B: 57.7 (#266)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | Mixtral 8x22B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1031 | 1147 |
| IFEval | — | 72.4% |
Long Context Mixtral 8x22B leads
Llama 3.2 1B: 31.9 (#274), Mixtral 8x22B: 34.7 (#247)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | Mixtral 8x22B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1050 | 1144 |
Writing & Preference Mixtral 8x22B leads
Llama 3.2 1B: 21.3 (#310), Mixtral 8x22B: 36.9 (#262)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | Mixtral 8x22B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1055 | 1162 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1033 | 1141 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1030 | 1130 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 200 | — |
| WildBench | — | 71.1% |
Frequently asked questions
Is Llama 3.2 1B better than Mixtral 8x22B?
Mixtral 8x22B is the stronger model overall, scoring 27.1 to 20.1 on the Noometry Index. Llama 3.2 1B costs 43× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Mixtral 8x22B's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, Llama 3.2 1B or Mixtral 8x22B?
Llama 3.2 1B is cheaper. It lists at $0.027 per million input tokens and $0.20 per million output tokens; Mixtral 8x22B lists at $2 and $6.
Is Llama 3.2 1B or Mixtral 8x22B better for coding?
Mixtral 8x22B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 24.2 versus 21.1 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Mixtral 8x22B does, with 64K tokens against 60K.
How many benchmarks do Llama 3.2 1B and Mixtral 8x22B share?
17 benchmarks have published results for both models. Llama 3.2 1B has 22 scored results on Noometry and Mixtral 8x22B has 34.