Model comparison

Llama 3.2 3B vs Step 3.5 Flash

Step 3.5 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.3 to 28.9 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified October 10, 2026. 13 shared benchmarks.

Summary

They share 13 benchmarks with published results for both. Llama 3.2 3B scores higher in 0 categories and Step 3.5 Flash in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Step 3.5 Flash leads 58.8 to 24.7.
Llama 3.2 3B is cheaper at $0.05 / $0.33 per million input/output tokens, against $0.10 / $0.30 for Step 3.5 Flash.
Step 3.5 Flash accepts more context: 256K tokens versus 131K.

Side by side

Llama 3.2 3B and Step 3.5 Flash specifications
	Llama 3.2 3B	Step 3.5 Flash
Provider	Meta	StepFun
Noometry Index	28.9	42.3
Released	2024-09-24	2026-01-29
Weights	Open	Open
Context window	131K	256K
Max output	118K	256K
Input $ / M tokens	$0.05	$0.10
Output $ / M tokens	$0.33	$0.30
Results tracked	18	19

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

Category by category

Coding Step 3.5 Flash leads

Llama 3.2 3B: 27.6 (#319), Step 3.5 Flash: 42.4 (#105)

Coding benchmarks
Benchmark	Llama 3.2 3B	Step 3.5 Flash
LMArena Coding	1098	1436
BigCodeBench Instruct	23.4%	—
BigCodeBench Complete	28.3%	—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Llama 3.2 3B: 20.1 (#143), Step 3.5 Flash: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
Benchmark	Llama 3.2 3B	Step 3.5 Flash
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard	21.9%	—
BALROG	10.1%	—

Reasoning Step 3.5 Flash leads

Llama 3.2 3B: 21.0 (#228), Step 3.5 Flash: 22.2 (#202)

Reasoning benchmarks
Benchmark	Llama 3.2 3B	Step 3.5 Flash
LMArena Hard Prompts	1095	1411
NYT Connections (extended)	—	28.4%

Math Step 3.5 Flash leads

Llama 3.2 3B: 32.4 (#214), Step 3.5 Flash: 42.6 (#84)

Math benchmarks
Benchmark	Llama 3.2 3B	Step 3.5 Flash
LMArena Math	1126	1408
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions	—	66.8%

Knowledge Step 3.5 Flash leads

Llama 3.2 3B: 29.7 (#235), Step 3.5 Flash: 39.6 (#132)

Knowledge benchmarks
Benchmark	Llama 3.2 3B	Step 3.5 Flash
LMArena Expert	1090	1421

Multilingual Step 3.5 Flash leads

Llama 3.2 3B: 26.2 (#281), Step 3.5 Flash: 50.5 (#119)

Multilingual benchmarks
Benchmark	Llama 3.2 3B	Step 3.5 Flash
LMArena Non-English	1019	1385
LMArena Chinese	1017	1447
LMArena German	1056	1405
LMArena Russian	949	1385
LMArena French	—	1421
LMArena Japanese	—	1354
LMArena Korean	—	1352
LMArena Spanish	—	1419

Instruction Following Step 3.5 Flash leads

Llama 3.2 3B: 56.0 (#275), Step 3.5 Flash: 73.1 (#124)

Instruction Following benchmarks
Benchmark	Llama 3.2 3B	Step 3.5 Flash
LMArena Instruction Following	1089	1385

Long Context Step 3.5 Flash leads

Llama 3.2 3B: 33.4 (#261), Step 3.5 Flash: 42.8 (#117)

Long Context benchmarks
Benchmark	Llama 3.2 3B	Step 3.5 Flash
LMArena Longer Query	1100	1402

Writing & Preference Step 3.5 Flash leads

Llama 3.2 3B: 24.7 (#307), Step 3.5 Flash: 58.8 (#113)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
Benchmark	Llama 3.2 3B	Step 3.5 Flash
LMArena Text	1110	1403
LMArena Creative Writing	1094	1357
LMArena Multi-Turn	1105	1405
EQ-Bench Creative Writing	595	—

Frequently asked questions

Is Llama 3.2 3B better than Step 3.5 Flash?

Step 3.5 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.3 to 28.9 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, Llama 3.2 3B or Step 3.5 Flash?

Llama 3.2 3B is cheaper. It lists at $0.05 per million input tokens and $0.33 per million output tokens; Step 3.5 Flash lists at $0.10 and $0.30.

Is Llama 3.2 3B or Step 3.5 Flash better for coding?

Step 3.5 Flash scores higher on coding benchmarks: 42.4 versus 27.6 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Step 3.5 Flash does, with 256K tokens against 131K.

How many benchmarks do Llama 3.2 3B and Step 3.5 Flash share?

13 benchmarks have published results for both models. Llama 3.2 3B has 18 scored results on Noometry and Step 3.5 Flash has 19.