Model comparison
Llama 3.2 3B vs phi-3-medium 14B
Llama 3.2 3B and phi-3-medium 14B score almost the same on the Noometry Index (28.9 vs 29.7), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Last verified . 2 shared benchmarks.
Meta
MicrosoftSummary
- They share 2 benchmarks with published results for both. Llama 3.2 3B scores higher in 2 categories and phi-3-medium 14B in 1 category; 3 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Llama 3.2 3B leads 29.7 to 9.1.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is BigCodeBench Complete: 28.3% for Llama 3.2 3B and 48.7% for phi-3-medium 14B.
Side by side
| Llama 3.2 3B | phi-3-medium 14B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Meta | Microsoft |
| Noometry Index | 28.9 | 29.7 |
| Released | 2024-09-24 | 2024-04-23 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 131K | — |
| Max output | 118K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.05 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.33 | — |
| Results tracked | 18 | 13 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding phi-3-medium 14B leads
Llama 3.2 3B: 27.6 (#319), phi-3-medium 14B: 36.8 (#201)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 3B | phi-3-medium 14B |
|---|---|---|
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 23.4% | 37.6% |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 28.3% | 48.7% |
| LMArena Coding | 1098 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Llama 3.2 3B: 20.1 (#143), phi-3-medium 14B: —
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 3B | phi-3-medium 14B |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 21.9% | — |
| BALROG | 10.1% | — |
Reasoning Not comparable
Llama 3.2 3B: 21.0 (#228), phi-3-medium 14B: —
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 3B | phi-3-medium 14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1095 | — |
| Adversarial NLI | — | 55.8% |
| BIG-Bench Hard | — | 81.4% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 121.23 |
| HellaSwag | — | 82.4% |
| WinoGrande | — | 81.5% |
Math Llama 3.2 3B leads
Llama 3.2 3B: 32.4 (#214), phi-3-medium 14B: 27.3 (#250)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 3B | phi-3-medium 14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1126 | — |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 17.6% |
Knowledge Llama 3.2 3B leads
Llama 3.2 3B: 29.7 (#235), phi-3-medium 14B: 9.1 (#306)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 3B | phi-3-medium 14B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 27.6% |
| LMArena Expert | 1090 | — |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | — | 91.6% |
| MMLU | — | 78% |
| OpenBookQA | — | 87.4% |
| TriviaQA | — | 73.9% |
Multilingual Not comparable
Llama 3.2 3B: 26.2 (#281), phi-3-medium 14B: —
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 3B | phi-3-medium 14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1019 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1017 | — |
| LMArena German | 1056 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 949 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Llama 3.2 3B: 56.0 (#275), phi-3-medium 14B: —
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 3B | phi-3-medium 14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1089 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
Llama 3.2 3B: 33.4 (#261), phi-3-medium 14B: —
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 3B | phi-3-medium 14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1100 | — |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Llama 3.2 3B: 24.7 (#307), phi-3-medium 14B: —
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 3B | phi-3-medium 14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1110 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1094 | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 595 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1105 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Llama 3.2 3B better than phi-3-medium 14B?
Llama 3.2 3B and phi-3-medium 14B score almost the same on the Noometry Index (28.9 vs 29.7), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Is Llama 3.2 3B or phi-3-medium 14B better for coding?
phi-3-medium 14B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 36.8 versus 27.6 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Llama 3.2 3B and phi-3-medium 14B share?
2 benchmarks have published results for both models. Llama 3.2 3B has 18 scored results on Noometry and phi-3-medium 14B has 13.