# Hy4 preview vs Llama 3.2 1B

> Hy4 preview is the stronger model overall, scoring 44.6 to 19.9 on the Noometry Index. Llama 3.2 1B costs 18× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Hy4 preview's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/hy4-preview-vs-llama-3-2-1b
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 0

## Summary

- The widest gap is in math, where Hy4 preview leads 54.5 to 9.7.
- Llama 3.2 1B is cheaper at $0.027 / $0.20 per million input/output tokens, against $0.83 / $2.50 for Hy4 preview.
- Hy4 preview accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 60K.

## Snapshot

| | Hy4 preview | Llama 3.2 1B |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Tencent | Meta |
| Noometry Index | 44.6 | 19.9 |
| Rank | 73 | 349 |
| Context | 1.05M | 60K |
| Input $/M | $0.83 | $0.027 |
| Output $/M | $2.50 | $0.20 |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- Hy4 preview: 51.4 (#36)
- Llama 3.2 1B: 20.6 (#333)

| Benchmark | Hy4 preview | Llama 3.2 1B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1633 | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 8.2% |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1071 |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 11.3% |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Hy4 preview: —
- Llama 3.2 1B: 14.5 (#142)

| Benchmark | Hy4 preview | Llama 3.2 1B |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 10.8% |
| BALROG | — | 6.6% |

## Reasoning

- Hy4 preview: 30.6 (#75)
- Llama 3.2 1B: 15.6 (#304)

| Benchmark | Hy4 preview | Llama 3.2 1B |
|---|---|---|
| NYT Connections (extended) | 68.2% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 0% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1044 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 101.95 |

## Math

- Hy4 preview: 54.5 (#37)
- Llama 3.2 1B: 9.7 (#308)

| Benchmark | Hy4 preview | Llama 3.2 1B |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 0.6% |
| ProofBench | 75% | — |
| LMArena Math | — | 1086 |

## Knowledge

- Hy4 preview: —
- Llama 3.2 1B: 7.2 (#307)

| Benchmark | Hy4 preview | Llama 3.2 1B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 23.9% |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1007 |

## Multilingual

- Hy4 preview: —
- Llama 3.2 1B: 23.9 (#287)

| Benchmark | Hy4 preview | Llama 3.2 1B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 973 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 958 |
| LMArena German | — | 1014 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 941 |

## Instruction Following

- Hy4 preview: —
- Llama 3.2 1B: 52.6 (#285)

| Benchmark | Hy4 preview | Llama 3.2 1B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1031 |

## Long Context

- Hy4 preview: —
- Llama 3.2 1B: 31.9 (#269)

| Benchmark | Hy4 preview | Llama 3.2 1B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1050 |

## Writing & Preference

- Hy4 preview: —
- Llama 3.2 1B: 21.4 (#305)

| Benchmark | Hy4 preview | Llama 3.2 1B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1055 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1033 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 200 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1030 |

## FAQ

### Is Hy4 preview better than Llama 3.2 1B?

Hy4 preview is the stronger model overall, scoring 44.6 to 19.9 on the Noometry Index. Llama 3.2 1B costs 18× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Hy4 preview's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

### Which is cheaper, Hy4 preview or Llama 3.2 1B?

Llama 3.2 1B is cheaper. It lists at $0.027 per million input tokens and $0.20 per million output tokens; Hy4 preview lists at $0.83 and $2.50.

### Is Hy4 preview or Llama 3.2 1B better for coding?

Hy4 preview scores higher on coding benchmarks: 51.4 versus 20.6 in the Noometry coding category.

### Which has the bigger context window?

Hy4 preview does, with 1.05M tokens against 60K.

### How many benchmarks do Hy4 preview and Llama 3.2 1B share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Hy4 preview has 3 scored results on Noometry and Llama 3.2 1B has 22.