Model comparison

Llama 3.1-405B vs Llama 3.2 3B

Llama 3.1-405B is the stronger model overall, scoring 30.7 to 28.9 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 14 shared benchmarks.

Llama 3.1-405B Meta

30.7

Rank #288 Confirmed

Llama 3.2 3B Meta

28.9

Rank #321 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 14 benchmarks with published results for both. Llama 3.1-405B scores higher in 7 categories and Llama 3.2 3B in 2 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in multilingual, where Llama 3.1-405B leads 40.7 to 26.2.

Side by side

Llama 3.1-405B and Llama 3.2 3B specifications
Llama 3.1-405BLlama 3.2 3B
ProviderMetaMeta
Noometry Index30.728.9
Released2024-07-232024-09-24
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window—131K
Max output—118K
Input $ / M tokens—$0.05
Output $ / M tokens—$0.33
Results tracked4218

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

Category by category

Coding Llama 3.1-405B leads

Llama 3.1-405B: 33.1 (#262), Llama 3.2 3B: 27.6 (#319)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3.1-405BLlama 3.2 3B
LMArena Coding12911098
WeirdML21.4%—
BigCodeBench Instruct—23.4%
BigCodeBench Complete—28.3%

Agentic & Tool Use Too close to call

Llama 3.1-405B: 21.0 (#140), Llama 3.2 3B: 20.1 (#143)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3.1-405BLlama 3.2 3B
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard—21.9%
TheAgentCompany7.4%—
Cybench7.5%—
BALROG—10.1%

Reasoning Llama 3.2 3B leads

Llama 3.1-405B: 16.8 (#300), Llama 3.2 3B: 21.0 (#228)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3.1-405BLlama 3.2 3B
LMArena Hard Prompts12691095
SimpleBench23%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark45%—
DTBench61.4%—
BIG-Bench Hard82.9%—
Epoch Capabilities Index128.75—
ForecastBench59.9—
HellaSwag89.2%—
PIQA85.9%—
WinoGrande89.2%—

Math Llama 3.2 3B leads

Llama 3.1-405B: 18.4 (#290), Llama 3.2 3B: 32.4 (#214)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3.1-405BLlama 3.2 3B
LMArena Math12811126
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-20259.7%—
Omni-MATH24.9%—
MATH Level 549.8%—

Knowledge Too close to call

Llama 3.1-405B: 30.4 (#227), Llama 3.2 3B: 29.7 (#235)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3.1-405BLlama 3.2 3B
LMArena Expert12431090
GPQA Diamond50.9%—
MMLU-Pro72.3%—
Confabulations17.6%—
GPQA (HELM)52.2%—
ARC (AI2) Challenge95.3%—
MMLU84.5%—
TriviaQA82.7%—

Multilingual Llama 3.1-405B leads

Llama 3.1-405B: 40.7 (#214), Llama 3.2 3B: 26.2 (#281)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3.1-405BLlama 3.2 3B
LMArena Non-English12481019
LMArena Chinese12421017
LMArena German12521056
LMArena Russian1265949
LMArena French1279—
LMArena Japanese1208—
LMArena Korean1184—
LMArena Spanish1260—

Instruction Following Llama 3.1-405B leads

Llama 3.1-405B: 65.9 (#214), Llama 3.2 3B: 56.0 (#275)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3.1-405BLlama 3.2 3B
LMArena Instruction Following12591089
IFEval81.1%—

Long Context Llama 3.1-405B leads

Llama 3.1-405B: 38.4 (#197), Llama 3.2 3B: 33.4 (#261)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3.1-405BLlama 3.2 3B
LMArena Longer Query12661100

Writing & Preference Llama 3.1-405B leads

Llama 3.1-405B: 38.9 (#251), Llama 3.2 3B: 24.7 (#307)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3.1-405BLlama 3.2 3B
LMArena Text12841110
LMArena Creative Writing12621094
EQ-Bench Creative Writing870595
LMArena Multi-Turn12971105
WildBench78.3%—

Frequently asked questions

Is Llama 3.1-405B better than Llama 3.2 3B?

Llama 3.1-405B is the stronger model overall, scoring 30.7 to 28.9 on the Noometry Index.

Is Llama 3.1-405B or Llama 3.2 3B better for coding?

Llama 3.1-405B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 33.1 versus 27.6 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Llama 3.1-405B and Llama 3.2 3B share?

14 benchmarks have published results for both models. Llama 3.1-405B has 42 scored results on Noometry and Llama 3.2 3B has 18.

Related comparisons

Go deeper