# Llama 3.2 1B vs Step 5 Preview

> Step 5 Preview is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.8 to 19.9 on the Noometry Index. Llama 3.2 1B costs 20× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Step 5 Preview's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/llama-3-2-1b-vs-step-5-preview
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 0

## Summary

- The widest gap is in coding, where Step 5 Preview leads 50.6 to 20.6.
- Llama 3.2 1B is cheaper at $0.027 / $0.20 per million input/output tokens, against $1 / $2.70 for Step 5 Preview.
- Step 5 Preview accepts more context: 1.02M tokens versus 60K.
- Llama 3.2 1B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | Llama 3.2 1B | Step 5 Preview |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Meta | StepFun |
| Noometry Index | 19.9 | 43.8 |
| Rank | 349 | 78 |
| Context | 60K | 1.02M |
| Input $/M | $0.027 | $1 |
| Output $/M | $0.20 | $2.70 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |

## Coding

- Llama 3.2 1B: 20.6 (#333)
- Step 5 Preview: 50.6 (#40)

| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | Step 5 Preview |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1569 |
| SciCode | — | 58.9% |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 8.2% | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1071 | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 11.3% | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Llama 3.2 1B: 14.5 (#142)
- Step 5 Preview: —

| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | Step 5 Preview |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 10.8% | — |
| BALROG | 6.6% | — |

## Reasoning

- Llama 3.2 1B: 15.6 (#304)
- Step 5 Preview: 38.0 (#58)

| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | Step 5 Preview |
|---|---|---|
| CritPt | — | 20.9% |
| Chess Puzzles | 0% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1044 | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 101.95 | — |

## Math

- Llama 3.2 1B: 9.7 (#308)
- Step 5 Preview: —

| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | Step 5 Preview |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 0.6% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1086 | — |

## Knowledge

- Llama 3.2 1B: 7.2 (#307)
- Step 5 Preview: —

| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | Step 5 Preview |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 23.9% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1007 | — |

## Multilingual

- Llama 3.2 1B: 23.9 (#287)
- Step 5 Preview: —

| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | Step 5 Preview |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 973 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 958 | — |
| LMArena German | 1014 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 941 | — |

## Instruction Following

- Llama 3.2 1B: 52.6 (#285)
- Step 5 Preview: —

| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | Step 5 Preview |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1031 | — |

## Long Context

- Llama 3.2 1B: 31.9 (#269)
- Step 5 Preview: —

| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | Step 5 Preview |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1050 | — |

## Writing & Preference

- Llama 3.2 1B: 21.4 (#305)
- Step 5 Preview: —

| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | Step 5 Preview |
|---|---|---|
| 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 5 Preview?

Step 5 Preview is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.8 to 19.9 on the Noometry Index. Llama 3.2 1B costs 20× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Step 5 Preview's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

### Which is cheaper, Llama 3.2 1B or Step 5 Preview?

Llama 3.2 1B is cheaper. It lists at $0.027 per million input tokens and $0.20 per million output tokens; Step 5 Preview lists at $1 and $2.70.

### Is Llama 3.2 1B or Step 5 Preview better for coding?

Step 5 Preview scores higher on coding benchmarks: 50.6 versus 20.6 in the Noometry coding category.

### Which has the bigger context window?

Step 5 Preview does, with 1.02M tokens against 60K.

### How many benchmarks do Llama 3.2 1B and Step 5 Preview share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Llama 3.2 1B has 22 scored results on Noometry and Step 5 Preview has 3.