Model comparison

Llama 3.2 3B vs Solar Pro4

Solar Pro4 is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.1 to 28.9 on the Noometry Index. Llama 3.2 3B costs 4.4× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Solar Pro4's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified October 10, 2026. 13 shared benchmarks.

Llama 3.2 3B

Summary

They share 13 benchmarks with published results for both. Llama 3.2 3B scores higher in 0 categories and Solar Pro4 in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Solar Pro4 leads 56.5 to 24.7.
Llama 3.2 3B is cheaper at $0.05 / $0.33 per million input/output tokens, against $0.30 / $1.20 for Solar Pro4.
Solar Pro4 accepts more context: 524K tokens versus 131K.
Llama 3.2 3B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Llama 3.2 3B and Solar Pro4 specifications
	Llama 3.2 3B	Solar Pro4
Provider	Meta	Upstage
Noometry Index	28.9	42.1
Released	2024-09-24	2026-08-06
Weights	Open	Proprietary
Context window	131K	524K
Max output	118K	131K
Input $ / M tokens	$0.05	$0.30
Output $ / M tokens	$0.33	$1.20
Results tracked	18	18

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

Category by category

Coding Solar Pro4 leads

Llama 3.2 3B: 27.6 (#319), Solar Pro4: 40.1 (#149)

Coding benchmarks
Benchmark	Llama 3.2 3B	Solar Pro4
LMArena Coding	1098	1437
LMArena WebDev	—	1371
BigCodeBench Instruct	23.4%	—
BigCodeBench Complete	28.3%	—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Llama 3.2 3B: 20.1 (#143), Solar Pro4: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
Benchmark	Llama 3.2 3B	Solar Pro4
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard	21.9%	—
BALROG	10.1%	—

Reasoning Solar Pro4 leads

Llama 3.2 3B: 21.0 (#228), Solar Pro4: 28.5 (#104)

Reasoning benchmarks
Benchmark	Llama 3.2 3B	Solar Pro4
LMArena Hard Prompts	1095	1399

Math Solar Pro4 leads

Llama 3.2 3B: 32.4 (#214), Solar Pro4: 38.8 (#128)

Math benchmarks
Benchmark	Llama 3.2 3B	Solar Pro4
LMArena Math	1126	1416

Knowledge Solar Pro4 leads

Llama 3.2 3B: 29.7 (#235), Solar Pro4: 39.8 (#129)

Knowledge benchmarks
Benchmark	Llama 3.2 3B	Solar Pro4
LMArena Expert	1090	1427

Multilingual Solar Pro4 leads

Llama 3.2 3B: 26.2 (#281), Solar Pro4: 48.7 (#139)

Multilingual benchmarks
Benchmark	Llama 3.2 3B	Solar Pro4
LMArena Non-English	1019	1361
LMArena Chinese	1017	1415
LMArena German	1056	1364
LMArena Russian	949	1360
LMArena French	—	1397
LMArena Japanese	—	1309
LMArena Korean	—	1382
LMArena Spanish	—	1401

Instruction Following Solar Pro4 leads

Llama 3.2 3B: 56.0 (#275), Solar Pro4: 72.7 (#132)

Instruction Following benchmarks
Benchmark	Llama 3.2 3B	Solar Pro4
LMArena Instruction Following	1089	1377

Long Context Solar Pro4 leads

Llama 3.2 3B: 33.4 (#261), Solar Pro4: 42.1 (#130)

Long Context benchmarks
Benchmark	Llama 3.2 3B	Solar Pro4
LMArena Longer Query	1100	1381

Writing & Preference Solar Pro4 leads

Llama 3.2 3B: 24.7 (#307), Solar Pro4: 56.5 (#138)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
Benchmark	Llama 3.2 3B	Solar Pro4
LMArena Text	1110	1386
LMArena Creative Writing	1094	1316
LMArena Multi-Turn	1105	1385
EQ-Bench Creative Writing	595	—

Frequently asked questions

Is Llama 3.2 3B better than Solar Pro4?

Which is cheaper, Llama 3.2 3B or Solar Pro4?

Llama 3.2 3B is cheaper. It lists at $0.05 per million input tokens and $0.33 per million output tokens; Solar Pro4 lists at $0.30 and $1.20.

Is Llama 3.2 3B or Solar Pro4 better for coding?

Solar Pro4 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 40.1 versus 27.6 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Solar Pro4 does, with 524K tokens against 131K.

How many benchmarks do Llama 3.2 3B and Solar Pro4 share?

13 benchmarks have published results for both models. Llama 3.2 3B has 18 scored results on Noometry and Solar Pro4 has 18.