Model comparison

Llama 3.2 3B vs Llama 3.2 90B

Llama 3.2 3B is the stronger model overall, scoring 28.4 to 27.1 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 1 shared benchmarks.

Llama 3.2 3B Meta

28.4

Rank #318 Confirmed

Llama 3.2 90B Meta

27.1

Rank #326 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 1 benchmark with published results for both. Llama 3.2 3B 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 math, where Llama 3.2 3B leads 29.9 to 10.4.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is BALROG: 10.1% for Llama 3.2 3B and 27.3% for Llama 3.2 90B.

Side by side

Llama 3.2 3B and Llama 3.2 90B specifications
Llama 3.2 3BLlama 3.2 90B
ProviderMetaMeta
Noometry Index28.427.1
Released2024-09-242024-09-24
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window131K—
Max output118K—
Input $ / M tokens$0.05—
Output $ / M tokens$0.33—
Results tracked189

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

Category by category

Coding Not comparable

Llama 3.2 3B: 27.1 (#314), Llama 3.2 90B: —

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3.2 3BLlama 3.2 90B
BigCodeBench Instruct23.4%—
LMArena Coding1098—
BigCodeBench Complete28.3%—

Agentic & Tool Use Llama 3.2 90B leads

Llama 3.2 3B: 19.9 (#135), Llama 3.2 90B: 29.7 (#73)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3.2 3BLlama 3.2 90B
BALROG10.1%27.3%
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard21.9%—

Reasoning Too close to call

Llama 3.2 3B: 20.1 (#225), Llama 3.2 90B: 20.9 (#207)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3.2 3BLlama 3.2 90B
EnigmaEval—0.4%
LMArena Hard Prompts1095—
Epoch Capabilities Index—125.5

Math Llama 3.2 3B leads

Llama 3.2 3B: 29.9 (#213), Llama 3.2 90B: 10.4 (#302)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3.2 3BLlama 3.2 90B
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—2.6%
LMArena Math1126—
MATH Level 5—39.4%

Knowledge Llama 3.2 3B leads

Llama 3.2 3B: 29.1 (#232), Llama 3.2 90B: 21.7 (#269)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3.2 3BLlama 3.2 90B
GPQA Diamond—41%
LMArena Expert1090—
MMLU—80.3%

Multimodal Not comparable

Llama 3.2 3B: —, Llama 3.2 90B: 24.9 (#119)

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3.2 3BLlama 3.2 90B
LMArena Vision—1000
GeoBench—52%

Multilingual Not comparable

Llama 3.2 3B: 26.4 (#276), Llama 3.2 90B: —

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3.2 3BLlama 3.2 90B
LMArena Non-English1019—
LMArena Chinese1017—
LMArena German1056—
LMArena Russian949—

Instruction Following Not comparable

Llama 3.2 3B: 56.3 (#270), Llama 3.2 90B: —

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3.2 3BLlama 3.2 90B
LMArena Instruction Following1089—

Long Context Not comparable

Llama 3.2 3B: 33.4 (#256), Llama 3.2 90B: —

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3.2 3BLlama 3.2 90B
LMArena Longer Query1101—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Llama 3.2 3B: 24.9 (#302), Llama 3.2 90B: —

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3.2 3BLlama 3.2 90B
LMArena Text1110—
LMArena Creative Writing1094—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing595—
LMArena Multi-Turn1105—

Frequently asked questions

Is Llama 3.2 3B better than Llama 3.2 90B?

Llama 3.2 3B is the stronger model overall, scoring 28.4 to 27.1 on the Noometry Index.

How many benchmarks do Llama 3.2 3B and Llama 3.2 90B share?

1 benchmark has published results for both models. Llama 3.2 3B has 18 scored results on Noometry and Llama 3.2 90B has 9.

Related comparisons

Go deeper