# Llama 3.2 1B vs Step 3.7 Flash

> Step 3.7 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 36.5 to 19.9 on the Noometry Index. Llama 3.2 1B costs 5.9× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Step 3.7 Flash's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/llama-3-2-1b-vs-step-3-7-flash
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 0

## Summary

- The widest gap is in math, where Step 3.7 Flash leads 40.9 to 9.7.
- Llama 3.2 1B is cheaper at $0.027 / $0.20 per million input/output tokens, against $0.18 / $1.11 for Step 3.7 Flash.
- Step 3.7 Flash accepts more context: 256K tokens versus 60K.

## Snapshot

| | Llama 3.2 1B | Step 3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Meta | StepFun |
| Noometry Index | 19.9 | 36.5 |
| Rank | 349 | 207 |
| Context | 60K | 256K |
| Input $/M | $0.027 | $0.18 |
| Output $/M | $0.20 | $1.11 |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- Llama 3.2 1B: 20.6 (#333)
- Step 3.7 Flash: 39.4 (#147)

| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | Step 3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | — | 40% |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 8.2% | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1071 | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 11.3% | — |
| ALE-Bench | — | 694.12 |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Llama 3.2 1B: 14.5 (#142)
- Step 3.7 Flash: —

| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | Step 3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 10.8% | — |
| BALROG | 6.6% | — |

## Reasoning

- Llama 3.2 1B: 15.6 (#304)
- Step 3.7 Flash: 20.9 (#211)

| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | Step 3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 39.7% |
| CritPt | — | 2.3% |
| Chess Puzzles | 0% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1044 | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 101.95 | — |

## Math

- Llama 3.2 1B: 9.7 (#308)
- Step 3.7 Flash: 40.9 (#74)

| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | Step 3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | — | 68.5% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 0.6% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1086 | — |

## Knowledge

- Llama 3.2 1B: 7.2 (#307)
- Step 3.7 Flash: —

| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | Step 3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 23.9% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1007 | — |

## Multilingual

- Llama 3.2 1B: 23.9 (#287)
- Step 3.7 Flash: —

| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | Step 3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 973 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 958 | — |
| LMArena German | 1014 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 941 | — |

## Instruction Following

- Llama 3.2 1B: 52.6 (#285)
- Step 3.7 Flash: —

| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | Step 3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1031 | — |

## Long Context

- Llama 3.2 1B: 31.9 (#269)
- Step 3.7 Flash: —

| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | Step 3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1050 | — |

## Writing & Preference

- Llama 3.2 1B: 21.4 (#305)
- Step 3.7 Flash: —

| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | Step 3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1055 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1033 | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 200 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1030 | — |

## FAQ

### Is Llama 3.2 1B better than Step 3.7 Flash?

Step 3.7 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 36.5 to 19.9 on the Noometry Index. Llama 3.2 1B costs 5.9× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Step 3.7 Flash's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

### Which is cheaper, Llama 3.2 1B or Step 3.7 Flash?

Llama 3.2 1B is cheaper. It lists at $0.027 per million input tokens and $0.20 per million output tokens; Step 3.7 Flash lists at $0.18 and $1.11.

### Is Llama 3.2 1B or Step 3.7 Flash better for coding?

Step 3.7 Flash scores higher on coding benchmarks: 39.4 versus 20.6 in the Noometry coding category.

### Which has the bigger context window?

Step 3.7 Flash does, with 256K tokens against 60K.

### How many benchmarks do Llama 3.2 1B and Step 3.7 Flash share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Llama 3.2 1B has 22 scored results on Noometry and Step 3.7 Flash has 5.