Noometry

Model comparison

Claude Opus 5.5 vs Llama 3.2 3B

Claude Opus 5.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 68.6 to 28.9 on the Noometry Index. Llama 3.2 3B costs 67× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 5.5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 13 shared benchmarks.

Claude Opus 5.5 Anthropic

68.6

Rank #3 Confirmed

Llama 3.2 3B Meta

28.9

Rank #321 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 13 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 5.5 scores higher in 9 categories and Llama 3.2 3B in 0 categories; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where Claude Opus 5.5 leads 91.8 to 32.4.
  • Llama 3.2 3B is cheaper at $0.05 / $0.33 per million input/output tokens, against $4 / $20 for Claude Opus 5.5.
  • Claude Opus 5.5 accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 131K.
  • Llama 3.2 3B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Claude Opus 5.5Llama 3.2 3B
ProviderAnthropicMeta
Noometry Index68.628.9
Released2026-09-222024-09-24
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1M131K
Max output128K118K
Input $ / M tokens$4$0.05
Output $ / M tokens$20$0.33
Results tracked4418

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 71.9 (#3), Llama 3.2 3B: 27.6 (#319)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Llama 3.2 3B
LMArena Coding15471098
FrontierCode54.6%—
CursorBench57.8%—
LMArena WebDev1813—
FrontierSWE62.3%—
SciCode66.9%—
BigCodeBench Instruct—23.4%
MirrorCode77.4%—
BigCodeBench Complete—28.3%
ALE-Bench2,147—

Agentic & Tool Use Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 45.3 (#15), Llama 3.2 3B: 20.1 (#143)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Llama 3.2 3B
APEX-Agents73.5%—
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard—21.9%
BALROG—10.1%
GDP.pdf30.6%—
Vending-Bench 29,235—

Reasoning Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 80.2 (#3), Llama 3.2 3B: 21.0 (#228)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Llama 3.2 3B
LMArena Hard Prompts15351095
ARC-AGI-293.3%—
NYT Connections (extended)88.5%—
ARC-AGI-198.5%—
CritPt31.7%—
EBR-Bench71.4%—
Mystery Game Puzzles71%—
DTBench98.9%—
LMCA68.2%—
Epoch Capabilities Index167.33—

Math Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 91.8 (#3), Llama 3.2 3B: 32.4 (#214)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Llama 3.2 3B
LMArena Math15061126
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)91.2%—
FrontierMath Tier 495%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025100%—
ProofBench100%—
FrontierMath Erdős2.9%—

Knowledge Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 66.4 (#10), Llama 3.2 3B: 29.7 (#235)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Llama 3.2 3B
LMArena Expert15471090
GPQA Diamond90.6%—
SimpleQA Verified72.2%—

Multimodal Not comparable

Claude Opus 5.5: 57.8 (#1), Llama 3.2 3B: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Llama 3.2 3B
LMArena Vision1321—
Blueprint-Bench 251.2%—
Furniture Assembly83.3%—

Multilingual Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 59.1 (#2), Llama 3.2 3B: 26.2 (#281)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Llama 3.2 3B
LMArena Non-English15071019
LMArena Chinese15881017
LMArena Russian1520949
LMArena French1514—
LMArena German—1056
LMArena Spanish1507—

Instruction Following Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 80.0 (#3), Llama 3.2 3B: 56.0 (#275)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Llama 3.2 3B
LMArena Instruction Following15371089

Long Context Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 47.1 (#19), Llama 3.2 3B: 33.4 (#261)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Llama 3.2 3B
LMArena Longer Query15321100

Writing & Preference Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 78.2 (#3), Llama 3.2 3B: 24.7 (#307)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Llama 3.2 3B
LMArena Text15151110
LMArena Creative Writing15331094
EQ-Bench Creative Writing2050595
LMArena Multi-Turn14991105

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Opus 5.5 better than Llama 3.2 3B?

Claude Opus 5.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 68.6 to 28.9 on the Noometry Index. Llama 3.2 3B costs 67× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 5.5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 5.5 or Llama 3.2 3B?

Llama 3.2 3B is cheaper. It lists at $0.05 per million input tokens and $0.33 per million output tokens; Claude Opus 5.5 lists at $4 and $20.

Is Claude Opus 5.5 or Llama 3.2 3B better for coding?

Claude Opus 5.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 71.9 versus 27.6 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Claude Opus 5.5 does, with 1M tokens against 131K.

How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 5.5 and Llama 3.2 3B share?

13 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 5.5 has 44 scored results on Noometry and Llama 3.2 3B has 18.

Related comparisons

Go deeper