# Llama 3.2 3B vs Pixtral Large

> Pixtral Large is the stronger model overall, scoring 32.2 to 28.9 on the Noometry Index. Llama 3.2 3B costs 25× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Pixtral Large's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/llama-3-2-3b-vs-pixtral-large
- Last updated: 2026-10-11
- Shared benchmarks: 1

## Summary

- They share 1 benchmark with published results for both. Llama 3.2 3B scores higher in 0 categories and Pixtral Large in 2 categories; one gap is clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Pixtral Large leads 32.9 to 24.7.
- Llama 3.2 3B is cheaper at $0.05 / $0.33 per million input/output tokens, against $2 / $6 for Pixtral Large.
- Llama 3.2 3B accepts more context: 131K tokens versus 128K.

## Snapshot

| | Llama 3.2 3B | Pixtral Large |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Meta | Mistral AI |
| Noometry Index | 28.9 | 32.2 |
| Rank | 321 | 259 |
| Context | 131K | 128K |
| Input $/M | $0.05 | $2 |
| Output $/M | $0.33 | $6 |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- Llama 3.2 3B: 27.6 (#319)
- Pixtral Large: —

| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 3B | Pixtral Large |
|---|---|---|
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 23.4% | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1098 | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 28.3% | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Llama 3.2 3B: 20.1 (#143)
- Pixtral Large: —

| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 3B | Pixtral Large |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 21.9% | — |
| BALROG | 10.1% | — |

## Reasoning

- Llama 3.2 3B: 21.0 (#228)
- Pixtral Large: 21.7 (#218)

| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 3B | Pixtral Large |
|---|---|---|
| EnigmaEval | — | 0.8% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1095 | — |

## Math

- Llama 3.2 3B: 32.4 (#214)
- Pixtral Large: —

| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 3B | Pixtral Large |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1126 | — |

## Knowledge

- Llama 3.2 3B: 29.7 (#235)
- Pixtral Large: —

| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 3B | Pixtral Large |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1090 | — |

## Multimodal

- Llama 3.2 3B: —
- Pixtral Large: 30.6 (#111)

| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 3B | Pixtral Large |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1089 |

## Multilingual

- Llama 3.2 3B: 26.2 (#281)
- Pixtral Large: —

| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 3B | Pixtral Large |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1019 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1017 | — |
| LMArena German | 1056 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 949 | — |

## Instruction Following

- Llama 3.2 3B: 56.0 (#275)
- Pixtral Large: —

| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 3B | Pixtral Large |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1089 | — |

## Long Context

- Llama 3.2 3B: 33.4 (#261)
- Pixtral Large: —

| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 3B | Pixtral Large |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1100 | — |

## Writing & Preference

- Llama 3.2 3B: 24.7 (#307)
- Pixtral Large: 32.9 (#278)

| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 3B | Pixtral Large |
|---|---|---|
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 595 | 988 |
| LMArena Text | 1110 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1094 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1105 | — |

## FAQ

### Is Llama 3.2 3B better than Pixtral Large?

Pixtral Large is the stronger model overall, scoring 32.2 to 28.9 on the Noometry Index. Llama 3.2 3B costs 25× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Pixtral Large's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

### Which is cheaper, Llama 3.2 3B or Pixtral Large?

Llama 3.2 3B is cheaper. It lists at $0.05 per million input tokens and $0.33 per million output tokens; Pixtral Large lists at $2 and $6.

### Which has the bigger context window?

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

### How many benchmarks do Llama 3.2 3B and Pixtral Large share?

1 benchmark has published results for both models. Llama 3.2 3B has 18 scored results on Noometry and Pixtral Large has 3.