# Command R+ vs Llama 3.2 3B

> Command R+ is the stronger model overall, scoring 32.0 to 28.4 on the Noometry Index. Llama 3.2 3B costs 36× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Command R+'s lead doesn't matter for your workload.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/command-r-plus-vs-llama-3-2-3b
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 15

## Summary

- They share 15 benchmarks with published results for both. Command R+ scores higher in 6 categories and Llama 3.2 3B in 2 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Command R+ leads 43.7 to 24.9.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is BigCodeBench Complete: 41.9% for Command R+ and 28.3% for Llama 3.2 3B.
- Llama 3.2 3B is cheaper at $0.05 / $0.33 per million input/output tokens, against $2.50 / $10 for Command R+.
- Llama 3.2 3B accepts more context: 131K tokens versus 128K.

## Snapshot

| | Command R+ | Llama 3.2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Cohere | Meta |
| Noometry Index | 32.0 | 28.4 |
| Rank | 251 | 318 |
| Context | 128K | 131K |
| Input $/M | $2.50 | $0.05 |
| Output $/M | $10 | $0.33 |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- Command R+: 28.6 (#304)
- Llama 3.2 3B: 27.1 (#314)

| Benchmark | Command R+ | Llama 3.2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 33.8% | 23.4% |
| LMArena Coding | 1187 | 1098 |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 41.9% | 28.3% |
| LiveBench Coding | 19.1% | — |
| HumanEval+ | 56.7% | — |
| MBPP+ | 63.5% | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Command R+: —
- Llama 3.2 3B: 19.9 (#135)

| Benchmark | Command R+ | Llama 3.2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 21.9% |
| BALROG | — | 10.1% |

## Reasoning

- Command R+: 8.9 (#341)
- Llama 3.2 3B: 20.1 (#225)

| Benchmark | Command R+ | Llama 3.2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1186 | 1095 |
| SimpleBench | 17.4% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 24.8% | — |
| DTBench | 54.9% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 38.1% | — |
| LMCA | 5% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 119.28 | — |
| LiveBench | 31.8% | — |

## Math

- Command R+: 26.6 (#239)
- Llama 3.2 3B: 29.9 (#213)

| Benchmark | Command R+ | Llama 3.2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1188 | 1126 |
| LiveBench Math | 21.3% | — |

## Knowledge

- Command R+: 35.9 (#165)
- Llama 3.2 3B: 29.1 (#232)

| Benchmark | Command R+ | Llama 3.2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1174 | 1090 |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 6.9% | — |
| MMLU | 69.4% | — |

## Multilingual

- Command R+: 38.8 (#222)
- Llama 3.2 3B: 26.4 (#276)

| Benchmark | Command R+ | Llama 3.2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1216 | 1019 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1226 | 1017 |
| LMArena German | 1216 | 1056 |
| LMArena Russian | 1227 | 949 |
| LMArena French | 1208 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1166 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1138 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1189 | — |

## Instruction Following

- Command R+: 60.2 (#249)
- Llama 3.2 3B: 56.3 (#270)

| Benchmark | Command R+ | Llama 3.2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1197 | 1089 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 57.6% | — |

## Long Context

- Command R+: 37.3 (#214)
- Llama 3.2 3B: 33.4 (#256)

| Benchmark | Command R+ | Llama 3.2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1231 | 1101 |

## Writing & Preference

- Command R+: 43.7 (#223)
- Llama 3.2 3B: 24.9 (#302)

| Benchmark | Command R+ | Llama 3.2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1229 | 1110 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1235 | 1094 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1213 | 1105 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 595 |
| LiveBench Language | 29.7% | — |

## FAQ

### Is Command R+ better than Llama 3.2 3B?

Command R+ is the stronger model overall, scoring 32.0 to 28.4 on the Noometry Index. Llama 3.2 3B costs 36× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Command R+'s lead doesn't matter for your workload.

### Which is cheaper, Command R+ or Llama 3.2 3B?

Llama 3.2 3B is cheaper. It lists at $0.05 per million input tokens and $0.33 per million output tokens; Command R+ lists at $2.50 and $10.

### Is Command R+ or Llama 3.2 3B better for coding?

Command R+ scores higher on coding benchmarks: 28.6 versus 27.1 in the Noometry coding category.

### Which has the bigger context window?

Llama 3.2 3B does, with 131K tokens against 128K.

### How many benchmarks do Command R+ and Llama 3.2 3B share?

15 benchmarks have published results for both models. Command R+ has 34 scored results on Noometry and Llama 3.2 3B has 18.