# Llama 2-7B vs Step 3

> Step 3 is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.9 to 28.6 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/llama-2-7b-vs-step-3
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 14

## Summary

- They share 14 benchmarks with published results for both. Llama 2-7B scores higher in 0 categories and Step 3 in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Step 3 leads 54.5 to 28.1.

## Snapshot

| | Llama 2-7B | Step 3 |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Meta | StepFun |
| Noometry Index | 28.6 | 39.9 |
| Rank | 315 | 145 |
| Context | — | — |
| Input $/M | — | — |
| Output $/M | — | — |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- Llama 2-7B: 28.7 (#302)
- Step 3: 39.5 (#144)

| Benchmark | Llama 2-7B | Step 3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1002 | 1367 |

## Reasoning

- Llama 2-7B: 15.1 (#309)
- Step 3: 27.6 (#102)

| Benchmark | Llama 2-7B | Step 3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1009 | 1355 |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 62.3% |
| Chess Puzzles | 0% | — |
| BIG-Bench Hard | 39.2% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 98.54 | — |
| HellaSwag | 77.2% | — |
| LAMBADA | 73.3% | — |
| PIQA | 78.8% | — |
| WinoGrande | 69.2% | — |

## Math

- Llama 2-7B: 28.2 (#231)
- Step 3: 34.9 (#148)

| Benchmark | Llama 2-7B | Step 3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1042 | 1366 |
| GSM8K | 16.7% | — |

## Knowledge

- Llama 2-7B: 27.7 (#243)
- Step 3: 36.2 (#161)

| Benchmark | Llama 2-7B | Step 3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1036 | 1333 |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | 45.9% | — |
| BoolQ | 77.9% | — |
| MMLU | 45.8% | — |
| OpenBookQA | 58.6% | — |
| TriviaQA | 73.7% | — |

## Multimodal

- Llama 2-7B: —
- Step 3: 34.9 (#81)

| Benchmark | Llama 2-7B | Step 3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1176 |
| ScienceQA | 43.1% | — |

## Multilingual

- Llama 2-7B: 23.9 (#288)
- Step 3: 46.5 (#154)

| Benchmark | Llama 2-7B | Step 3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 973 | 1327 |
| LMArena Chinese | 973 | 1396 |
| LMArena German | 978 | 1371 |
| LMArena Russian | 995 | 1331 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1007 | 1372 |
| LMArena French | 969 | — |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1271 |

## Instruction Following

- Llama 2-7B: 51.0 (#293)
- Step 3: 70.6 (#159)

| Benchmark | Llama 2-7B | Step 3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1006 | 1332 |

## Long Context

- Llama 2-7B: 30.4 (#282)
- Step 3: 40.3 (#152)

| Benchmark | Llama 2-7B | Step 3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 999 | 1326 |

## Writing & Preference

- Llama 2-7B: 28.1 (#293)
- Step 3: 54.5 (#146)

| Benchmark | Llama 2-7B | Step 3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1053 | 1351 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1033 | 1322 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1029 | 1340 |

## FAQ

### Is Llama 2-7B better than Step 3?

Step 3 is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.9 to 28.6 on the Noometry Index.

### Is Llama 2-7B or Step 3 better for coding?

Step 3 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 39.5 versus 28.7 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do Llama 2-7B and Step 3 share?

14 benchmarks have published results for both models. Llama 2-7B has 29 scored results on Noometry and Step 3 has 17.