Model comparison

Llama 3-8B vs phi-3-medium 14B

phi-3-medium 14B is the stronger model overall, scoring 29.1 to 25.3 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 11 shared benchmarks.

Llama 3-8B Meta

25.3

Rank #338 Confirmed

phi-3-medium 14B Microsoft

29.1

Rank #306 Reported

Summary

  • They share 11 benchmarks with published results for both. Llama 3-8B scores higher in 0 categories and phi-3-medium 14B in 3 categories; 3 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where phi-3-medium 14B leads 25.2 to 8.3.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is BigCodeBench Complete: 36.9% for Llama 3-8B and 48.7% for phi-3-medium 14B.

Side by side

Llama 3-8B and phi-3-medium 14B specifications
Llama 3-8Bphi-3-medium 14B
ProviderMetaMicrosoft
Noometry Index25.329.1
Released2024-04-182024-04-23
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window8K—
Max output8K—
Input $ / M tokens$0.14—
Output $ / M tokens$0.14—
Results tracked3413

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

Category by category

Coding phi-3-medium 14B leads

Llama 3-8B: 30.5 (#285), phi-3-medium 14B: 36.3 (#198)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3-8Bphi-3-medium 14B
BigCodeBench Instruct31.9%37.6%
BigCodeBench Complete36.9%48.7%
LMArena Coding1152—
HumanEval+56.7%—
MBPP+54.8%—

Reasoning Not comparable

Llama 3-8B: 13.8 (#321), phi-3-medium 14B: —

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3-8Bphi-3-medium 14B
Adversarial NLI57.3%55.8%
Epoch Capabilities Index116.33121.18
WinoGrande75.7%81.5%
Chess Puzzles0%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1133—
DTBench43.9%—
BIG-Bench Hard—81.4%
ForecastBench58.6—
HellaSwag—82.4%

Math phi-3-medium 14B leads

Llama 3-8B: 8.3 (#317), phi-3-medium 14B: 25.2 (#249)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3-8Bphi-3-medium 14B
MATH Level 56.1%17.6%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-20251.9%—
LMArena Math1151—

Knowledge phi-3-medium 14B leads

Llama 3-8B: 7.8 (#303), phi-3-medium 14B: 9.1 (#301)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3-8Bphi-3-medium 14B
GPQA Diamond26.1%27.6%
ARC (AI2) Challenge82.8%91.6%
MMLU68.8%78%
OpenBookQA82.6%87.4%
TriviaQA67.7%73.9%
LMArena Expert1113—

Multilingual Not comparable

Llama 3-8B: 31.0 (#256), phi-3-medium 14B: —

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3-8Bphi-3-medium 14B
LMArena Non-English1098—
LMArena Chinese1076—
LMArena French1158—
LMArena German1104—
LMArena Japanese967—
LMArena Korean1003—
LMArena Russian1109—
LMArena Spanish1172—

Instruction Following Not comparable

Llama 3-8B: 58.7 (#255), phi-3-medium 14B: —

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3-8Bphi-3-medium 14B
LMArena Instruction Following1127—

Long Context Not comparable

Llama 3-8B: 34.2 (#246), phi-3-medium 14B: —

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3-8Bphi-3-medium 14B
LMArena Longer Query1128—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Llama 3-8B: 37.7 (#251), phi-3-medium 14B: —

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3-8Bphi-3-medium 14B
LMArena Text1166—
LMArena Creative Writing1150—
LMArena Multi-Turn1152—

Frequently asked questions

Is Llama 3-8B better than phi-3-medium 14B?

phi-3-medium 14B is the stronger model overall, scoring 29.1 to 25.3 on the Noometry Index.

Is Llama 3-8B or phi-3-medium 14B better for coding?

phi-3-medium 14B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 36.3 versus 30.5 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Llama 3-8B and phi-3-medium 14B share?

11 benchmarks have published results for both models. Llama 3-8B has 34 scored results on Noometry and phi-3-medium 14B has 13.

Related comparisons

Go deeper