# Llama 3.2 3B vs Qwen2-72B

> Qwen2-72B is the stronger model overall, scoring 30.0 to 28.9 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/llama-3-2-3b-vs-qwen2-72b
- Last updated: 2026-10-12
- Shared benchmarks: 15

## Summary

- They share 15 benchmarks with published results for both. Llama 3.2 3B scores higher in 3 categories and Qwen2-72B in 6 categories; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Qwen2-72B leads 40.8 to 24.7.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is BigCodeBench Complete: 28.3% for Llama 3.2 3B and 54% for Qwen2-72B.

## Snapshot

| | Llama 3.2 3B | Qwen2-72B |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Meta | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 28.9 | 30.0 |
| Rank | 321 | 300 |
| Context | 131K | — |
| Input $/M | $0.05 | — |
| Output $/M | $0.33 | — |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- Llama 3.2 3B: 27.6 (#319)
- Qwen2-72B: 29.1 (#310)

| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 3B | Qwen2-72B |
|---|---|---|
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 23.4% | 38.5% |
| LMArena Coding | 1098 | 1196 |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 28.3% | 54% |
| WeirdML | — | 11.3% |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Llama 3.2 3B: 20.1 (#143)
- Qwen2-72B: 17.0 (#146)

| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 3B | Qwen2-72B |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 21.9% | — |
| TheAgentCompany | — | 1.1% |
| BALROG | 10.1% | — |
| METR Time Horizons | — | 29.9% |

## Reasoning

- Llama 3.2 3B: 21.0 (#228)
- Qwen2-72B: 23.2 (#181)

| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 3B | Qwen2-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1095 | 1191 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 125.28 |

## Math

- Llama 3.2 3B: 32.4 (#214)
- Qwen2-72B: 30.2 (#236)

| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 3B | Qwen2-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1126 | 1235 |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 39.1% |

## Knowledge

- Llama 3.2 3B: 29.7 (#235)
- Qwen2-72B: 21.2 (#275)

| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 3B | Qwen2-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1090 | 1171 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 40.8% |
| MMLU | — | 82.4% |

## Multilingual

- Llama 3.2 3B: 26.2 (#281)
- Qwen2-72B: 35.9 (#244)

| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 3B | Qwen2-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1019 | 1176 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1017 | 1240 |
| LMArena German | 1056 | 1151 |
| LMArena Russian | 949 | 1169 |
| LMArena French | — | 1170 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1111 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1083 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1169 |

## Instruction Following

- Llama 3.2 3B: 56.0 (#275)
- Qwen2-72B: 61.7 (#241)

| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 3B | Qwen2-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1089 | 1181 |

## Long Context

- Llama 3.2 3B: 33.4 (#261)
- Qwen2-72B: 36.1 (#235)

| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 3B | Qwen2-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1100 | 1192 |

## Writing & Preference

- Llama 3.2 3B: 24.7 (#307)
- Qwen2-72B: 40.8 (#241)

| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 3B | Qwen2-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1110 | 1203 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1094 | 1181 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1105 | 1196 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 595 | — |

## FAQ

### Is Llama 3.2 3B better than Qwen2-72B?

Qwen2-72B is the stronger model overall, scoring 30.0 to 28.9 on the Noometry Index.

### Is Llama 3.2 3B or Qwen2-72B better for coding?

Qwen2-72B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 29.1 versus 27.6 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do Llama 3.2 3B and Qwen2-72B share?

15 benchmarks have published results for both models. Llama 3.2 3B has 18 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2-72B has 26.