Model comparison
Llama 3.2 1B vs Wizardlm 13b
Wizardlm 13b is the stronger model overall, scoring 31.4 to 20.1 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 10 shared benchmarks.
Meta
MicrosoftSummary
- They share 10 benchmarks with published results for both. Llama 3.2 1B scores higher in 0 categories and Wizardlm 13b in 7 categories; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Wizardlm 13b leads 30.2 to 10.4.
Side by side
| Llama 3.2 1B | Wizardlm 13b | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Meta | Microsoft |
| Noometry Index | 20.1 | 31.4 |
| Released | 2024-09-24 | — |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 60K | — |
| Max output | 54K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.027 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.20 | — |
| Results tracked | 22 | 10 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Wizardlm 13b leads
Llama 3.2 1B: 21.1 (#338), Wizardlm 13b: 30.1 (#298)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | Wizardlm 13b |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1070 | 1035 |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 8.2% | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 11.3% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Llama 3.2 1B: 14.6 (#150), Wizardlm 13b: —
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | Wizardlm 13b |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 10.8% | — |
| BALROG | 6.6% | — |
Reasoning Wizardlm 13b leads
Llama 3.2 1B: 16.2 (#308), Wizardlm 13b: 19.4 (#259)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | Wizardlm 13b |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1044 | 1018 |
| Chess Puzzles | 0% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 101.99 | — |
Math Wizardlm 13b leads
Llama 3.2 1B: 10.4 (#313), Wizardlm 13b: 30.2 (#238)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | Wizardlm 13b |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1086 | 1017 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 0.6% | — |
Knowledge Not comparable
Llama 3.2 1B: 7.2 (#312), Wizardlm 13b: —
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | Wizardlm 13b |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 23.9% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1007 | — |
Multilingual Wizardlm 13b leads
Llama 3.2 1B: 23.8 (#292), Wizardlm 13b: 27.1 (#277)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | Wizardlm 13b |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 973 | 1034 |
| LMArena Chinese | 959 | 1023 |
| LMArena German | 1014 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 941 | — |
Instruction Following Wizardlm 13b leads
Llama 3.2 1B: 52.4 (#290), Wizardlm 13b: 53.5 (#285)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | Wizardlm 13b |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1031 | 1048 |
Long Context Too close to call
Llama 3.2 1B: 31.9 (#274), Wizardlm 13b: 32.0 (#273)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | Wizardlm 13b |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1050 | 1054 |
Writing & Preference Wizardlm 13b leads
Llama 3.2 1B: 21.3 (#310), Wizardlm 13b: 30.5 (#287)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | Wizardlm 13b |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1055 | 1077 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1033 | 1091 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1030 | 1047 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 200 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Llama 3.2 1B better than Wizardlm 13b?
Wizardlm 13b is the stronger model overall, scoring 31.4 to 20.1 on the Noometry Index.
Is Llama 3.2 1B or Wizardlm 13b better for coding?
Wizardlm 13b scores higher on coding benchmarks: 30.1 versus 21.1 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Llama 3.2 1B and Wizardlm 13b share?
10 benchmarks have published results for both models. Llama 3.2 1B has 22 scored results on Noometry and Wizardlm 13b has 10.