Noometry

Model comparison

Llama 3.2 1B vs Nova Premier 1.0

Nova Premier 1.0 is the stronger model overall, scoring 37.7 to 19.9 on the Noometry Index. Llama 3.2 1B costs 71× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Nova Premier 1.0's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.

Llama 3.2 1B Meta

19.9

Rank #349 Confirmed

Nova Premier 1.0 Amazon

37.7

Rank #185 Confirmed

Summary

  • The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Nova Premier 1.0 leads 51.0 to 21.4.
  • Llama 3.2 1B is cheaper at $0.027 / $0.20 per million input/output tokens, against $2.50 / $12.50 for Nova Premier 1.0.
  • Nova Premier 1.0 accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 60K.
  • Llama 3.2 1B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Llama 3.2 1BNova Premier 1.0
ProviderMetaAmazon
Noometry Index19.937.7
Released2024-09-242025-04-30
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window60K1M
Max output54K10K
Input $ / M tokens$0.027$2.50
Output $ / M tokens$0.20$12.50
Results tracked226

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

Category by category

Coding Not comparable

Llama 3.2 1B: 20.6 (#333), Nova Premier 1.0: —

BenchmarkLlama 3.2 1BNova Premier 1.0
BigCodeBench Instruct8.2%—
LMArena Coding1071—
BigCodeBench Complete11.3%—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Llama 3.2 1B: 14.5 (#142), Nova Premier 1.0: —

BenchmarkLlama 3.2 1BNova Premier 1.0
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard10.8%—
BALROG6.6%—

Reasoning Nova Premier 1.0 leads

Llama 3.2 1B: 15.6 (#304), Nova Premier 1.0: 22.3 (#182)

BenchmarkLlama 3.2 1BNova Premier 1.0
Kagi LLM Benchmark—44.8%
Chess Puzzles0%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1044—
Epoch Capabilities Index101.95—

Math Nova Premier 1.0 leads

Llama 3.2 1B: 9.7 (#308), Nova Premier 1.0: 31.5 (#194)

BenchmarkLlama 3.2 1BNova Premier 1.0
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-20250.6%—
Omni-MATH—35%
LMArena Math1086—

Knowledge Nova Premier 1.0 leads

Llama 3.2 1B: 7.2 (#307), Nova Premier 1.0: 35.4 (#176)

BenchmarkLlama 3.2 1BNova Premier 1.0
GPQA Diamond23.9%—
MMLU-Pro—72.6%
GPQA (HELM)—51.8%
LMArena Expert1007—

Multilingual Not comparable

Llama 3.2 1B: 23.9 (#287), Nova Premier 1.0: —

BenchmarkLlama 3.2 1BNova Premier 1.0
LMArena Non-English973—
LMArena Chinese958—
LMArena German1014—
LMArena Russian941—

Instruction Following Nova Premier 1.0 leads

Llama 3.2 1B: 52.6 (#285), Nova Premier 1.0: 66.9 (#201)

BenchmarkLlama 3.2 1BNova Premier 1.0
IFEval—80.3%
LMArena Instruction Following1031—

Long Context Not comparable

Llama 3.2 1B: 31.9 (#269), Nova Premier 1.0: —

BenchmarkLlama 3.2 1BNova Premier 1.0
LMArena Longer Query1050—

Writing & Preference Nova Premier 1.0 leads

Llama 3.2 1B: 21.4 (#305), Nova Premier 1.0: 51.0 (#174)

BenchmarkLlama 3.2 1BNova Premier 1.0
LMArena Text1055—
LMArena Creative Writing1033—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing200—
WildBench—78.8%
LMArena Multi-Turn1030—

Frequently asked questions

Is Llama 3.2 1B better than Nova Premier 1.0?

Nova Premier 1.0 is the stronger model overall, scoring 37.7 to 19.9 on the Noometry Index. Llama 3.2 1B costs 71× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Nova Premier 1.0's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, Llama 3.2 1B or Nova Premier 1.0?

Llama 3.2 1B is cheaper. It lists at $0.027 per million input tokens and $0.20 per million output tokens; Nova Premier 1.0 lists at $2.50 and $12.50.

Which has the bigger context window?

Nova Premier 1.0 does, with 1M tokens against 60K.

How many benchmarks do Llama 3.2 1B and Nova Premier 1.0 share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Llama 3.2 1B has 22 scored results on Noometry and Nova Premier 1.0 has 6.

Related comparisons

Go deeper