Model comparison

Llama 3.2 3B vs o3-pro

o3-pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.9 to 28.9 on the Noometry Index. Llama 3.2 3B costs 292× less per token, which makes it the better buy when o3-pro's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified October 10, 2026. 0 shared benchmarks.

Llama 3.2 3B

Summary

The widest gap is in long context, where o3-pro leads 72.2 to 33.4.
Llama 3.2 3B is cheaper at $0.05 / $0.33 per million input/output tokens, against $20 / $80 for o3-pro.
o3-pro accepts more context: 200K tokens versus 131K.
Llama 3.2 3B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Llama 3.2 3B and o3-pro specifications
	Llama 3.2 3B	o3-pro
Provider	Meta	OpenAI
Noometry Index	28.9	42.9
Released	2024-09-24	2025-06-10
Weights	Open	Proprietary
Context window	131K	200K
Max output	118K	100K
Input $ / M tokens	$0.05	$20
Output $ / M tokens	$0.33	$80
Results tracked	18	12

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

Category by category

Coding o3-pro leads

Llama 3.2 3B: 27.6 (#319), o3-pro: 55.5 (#24)

Coding benchmarks
Benchmark	Llama 3.2 3B	o3-pro
Aider Polyglot	—	84.9%
WeirdML	—	58.2%
BigCodeBench Instruct	23.4%	—
LMArena Coding	1098	—
BigCodeBench Complete	28.3%	—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Llama 3.2 3B: 20.1 (#143), o3-pro: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
Benchmark	Llama 3.2 3B	o3-pro
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard	21.9%	—
BALROG	10.1%	—

Reasoning o3-pro leads

Llama 3.2 3B: 21.0 (#228), o3-pro: 23.8 (#171)

Reasoning benchmarks
Benchmark	Llama 3.2 3B	o3-pro
ARC-AGI-2	—	4.9%
Kagi LLM Benchmark	—	72.1%
ARC-AGI-1	—	59.3%
LMArena Hard Prompts	1095	—
DTBench	—	86.9%
LMCA	—	38.5%
Epoch Capabilities Index	—	147.42

Math Not comparable

Llama 3.2 3B: 32.4 (#214), o3-pro: —

Math benchmarks
Benchmark	Llama 3.2 3B	o3-pro
LMArena Math	1126	—

Knowledge Too close to call

Llama 3.2 3B: 29.7 (#235), o3-pro: 29.5 (#238)

Knowledge benchmarks
Benchmark	Llama 3.2 3B	o3-pro
Confabulations	—	14.2%
Vectara Hallucination Rate	—	23.3%
LMArena Expert	1090	—

Multilingual Not comparable

Llama 3.2 3B: 26.2 (#281), o3-pro: —

Multilingual benchmarks
Benchmark	Llama 3.2 3B	o3-pro
LMArena Non-English	1019	—
LMArena Chinese	1017	—
LMArena German	1056	—
LMArena Russian	949	—

Instruction Following Not comparable

Llama 3.2 3B: 56.0 (#275), o3-pro: —

Instruction Following benchmarks
Benchmark	Llama 3.2 3B	o3-pro
LMArena Instruction Following	1089	—

Long Context o3-pro leads

Llama 3.2 3B: 33.4 (#261), o3-pro: 72.2 (#1)

Long Context benchmarks
Benchmark	Llama 3.2 3B	o3-pro
Fiction.LiveBench	—	97.2%
LMArena Longer Query	1100	—

Writing & Preference o3-pro leads

Llama 3.2 3B: 24.7 (#307), o3-pro: 57.1 (#133)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
Benchmark	Llama 3.2 3B	o3-pro
LMArena Text	1110	—
LMArena Creative Writing	1094	—
Short-Story Creative Writing	—	84.4%
EQ-Bench Creative Writing	595	—
LMArena Multi-Turn	1105	—

Frequently asked questions

Is Llama 3.2 3B better than o3-pro?

Which is cheaper, Llama 3.2 3B or o3-pro?

Llama 3.2 3B is cheaper. It lists at $0.05 per million input tokens and $0.33 per million output tokens; o3-pro lists at $20 and $80.

Is Llama 3.2 3B or o3-pro better for coding?

o3-pro scores higher on coding benchmarks: 55.5 versus 27.6 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

o3-pro does, with 200K tokens against 131K.

How many benchmarks do Llama 3.2 3B and o3-pro share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Llama 3.2 3B has 18 scored results on Noometry and o3-pro has 12.