Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Claude Opus 4.1 vs Llama 3.2 3B Instruct

Claude Opus 4.1 leads Llama 3.2 3B Instruct on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 22.8 to 5.7, and Llama 3.2 3B Instruct costs 225.6x less per output token ($0.3325 vs $75.00 per million). Updated October 21, 2026; 24 benchmarks have a result for both.

Replace Claude Opus 4.1 Replace Llama 3.2 3B Instruct
Claude Opus 4.1Anthropic
Coding
No data
Overall
50.2
Output $/M
$75.00
24
Llama 3.2 3B InstructMeta Llama
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.3325
0
vs boards won of 24 shared

Claude Opus 4.1 or Llama 3.2 3B Instruct: which to pick

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick Claude Opus 4.1 for a larger context window (200K against 131K tokens).

Model AClaude Opus 4.1AnthropicNot benchmarked1 independent benchmarkNo cost per solved taskModel BLlama 3.2 3B InstructMeta LlamaNot benchmarkedNo coding benchmarkNo cost per solved task
Shared results
24
Claude Opus 4.1 only
49
Llama 3.2 3B Instruct only
11
Like-for-like categories
6 of 9

Only benchmarks that tested both models count toward a pick; a result only one model has is shown but not compared.

Which one for your work

Each card is decided by one number both models carry. Where only one has it, the card says so and makes no call.

At a glance

Coding index
Claude Opus 4.1 not benchmarked, Llama 3.2 3B Instruct not benchmarked.
Widest category
Coding, 61.2 points apart on average over 2 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
LMArena Text: Russian: Claude Opus 4.1 1422 against Llama 3.2 3B Instruct 949, 70.3 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Claude Opus 4.1 $75.00 against Llama 3.2 3B Instruct $0.3325 per million output tokens, 225.6x apart.
Context window
Claude Opus 4.1 takes 200K tokens, Llama 3.2 3B Instruct 131K.

Benchmark by benchmark

First the score: boards each model leads, per category, where both have a result. Then every board, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale, so compare the two in a row, not one row with another.

Boards won, where both have a result
CategoryClaude Opus 4.1BarsLlama 3.2 3B InstructTies
Coding20
Intelligence10
Reasoning30
Math20
Knowledge40
General120
All shared boards240
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index20
Coding benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.1 and Llama 3.2 3B Instruct
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Llama 3.2 3B InstructLeader
LMArena WebDev1390Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)66.5%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured8.3%Only Llama 3.2 3B Instruct measured
Terminal-Bench38.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
WeirdML45.9%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
Cybench42.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LMArena Text: coding14791098Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: software and IT14561103Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena WebDev: HTML1399Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
SciCode4.6%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 29 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Intelligence benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.1 and Llama 3.2 3B Instruct
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Llama 3.2 3B InstructLeader
AA Intelligence Index22.85.7Claude Opus 4.1
Epoch Capabilities Index144.1Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index6 boards, none shared
Agentic work benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.1 and Llama 3.2 3B Instruct
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Llama 3.2 3B InstructLeader
τ²-Bench TelecomNot measured21.1%Only Llama 3.2 3B Instruct measured
METR time horizons66.8%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
GDPval43.6%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
BALROGNot measured10.1%Only Llama 3.2 3B Instruct measured
DeepResearch Bench48.3%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL)Not measured21.9%Only Llama 3.2 3B Instruct measured
Neither model has a result on the other 35 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index30
Reasoning benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.1 and Llama 3.2 3B Instruct
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Llama 3.2 3B InstructLeader
GPQA Diamond76.3%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
MMMU Pro (Vals AI)77.5%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured25.5%Only Llama 3.2 3B Instruct measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured5.3%Only Llama 3.2 3B Instruct measured
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)77.3%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
SimpleBench60.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
Mystery game puzzles21.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
EBR-bench7.9%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
VPCT35.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts14421095Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: expert14381090Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English14511141Claude Opus 4.1
Neither model has a result on the other 10 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
Math benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.1 and Llama 3.2 3B Instruct
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Llama 3.2 3B InstructLeader
AIME78.2%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
MATH 500 (Vals AI)95.4%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
MGSM (Vals AI)94.4%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
AA Math IndexNot measured3.3Only Llama 3.2 3B Instruct measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured3.3%Only Llama 3.2 3B Instruct measured
OTIS Mock AIME68.9%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 312.6%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
FrontierMath, tier 42.4%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LMArena Text: math14311126Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: mathematical work14341128Claude Opus 4.1
Neither model has a result on the other 3 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index40
Knowledge benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.1 and Llama 3.2 3B Instruct
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Llama 3.2 3B InstructLeader
MMLU Pro87.9%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LegalBench (Vals AI)83.5%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
TaxEval (Vals AI)73.7%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
MortgageTax (Vals AI)61.1%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
MedQA (Vals AI)93.6%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
MedCode (Vals AI)47.2%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured34.7%Only Llama 3.2 3B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: science14221106Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare14161104Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: legal and government14211115Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: business and finance14061074Claude Opus 4.1
FACTS Benchmark Suite40.4%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 6 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index8 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.1 and Llama 3.2 3B Instruct
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Llama 3.2 3B InstructLeader
Design Arena: websites1177Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
Design Arena: UI components1165Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
Design Arena: game dev1171Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
Design Arena: data viz1166Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
Design Arena: 3D1153Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
Design Arena: all code categories1171Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
Design Arena: SVG1152Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
Design Arena: ASCII art1167Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index120
General benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.1 and Llama 3.2 3B Instruct
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Llama 3.2 3B InstructLeader
SAGE (Vals AI)31.4%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
MedScribe (Vals AI)73.9%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
IFBenchNot measured26.2%Only Llama 3.2 3B Instruct measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)Not measured4.3%Only Llama 3.2 3B Instruct measured
DTBench80.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LMCA37.1%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
Creative writing (Lech Mazur)84.7%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LMArena Text14191110Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: instruction following14351089Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: creative writing14121094Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: English14331180Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: non-English14051019Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: Chinese14271017Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: German14131056Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: Japanese1377Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LMArena Text: Korean1381Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LMArena Text: French1433Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LMArena Text: Spanish1448Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LMArena Text: Russian1422949Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: Polish1413Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn14441105Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: longer queries14551100Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: writing and language14181096Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: entertainment and media13981083Claude Opus 4.1
Neither model has a result on the other 22 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.1 and Llama 3.2 3B Instruct
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Llama 3.2 3B InstructLeader
Neither model has a result on 5 boards here

What each workload costs

Three fixed token mixes at each model's listed price, so per-token rates become a bill.

Chat turn

1K input + 500 output tokens

Claude Opus 4.1$0.052Fits in one request
Llama 3.2 3B Instruct$0.0002Fits in one request

Llama 3.2 3B Instruct costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Claude Opus 4.1$0.975Fits in one request
Llama 3.2 3B Instruct$0.0035Fits in one request

Llama 3.2 3B Instruct costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Claude Opus 4.1$3.75Exceeds the context window
Llama 3.2 3B Instruct$0.013Exceeds the context window

Llama 3.2 3B Instruct costs less

Listed OpenRouter rates, without cache or batch discounts. A workload that does not fit a model's context window would need splitting.

Specification differences

The leading value in a row is marked; a row with a missing value names no leader. Our two rows are marked in red.

Specifications of Claude Opus 4.1 and Llama 3.2 3B Instruct
SpecificationAnthropic Claude Opus 4.1Meta Llama 3.2 3B Instruct
MakerAnthropicMeta Llama
WeightsNo public weights listedOpen weights
ReleasedAugust 5, 2025September 25, 2024
Context window200K131K
Input $/Mtok$15.00$0.0505
Output $/Mtok$75.00$0.3325
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it10
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Claude Opus 4.1 better than Llama 3.2 3B Instruct for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Claude Opus 4.1 for a larger context window (200K against 131K tokens).

Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.1 or Llama 3.2 3B Instruct?

Claude Opus 4.1 costs $15.00 per million input tokens and $75.00 per million output tokens; Llama 3.2 3B Instruct costs $0.0505 and $0.3325. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, Claude Opus 4.1 or Llama 3.2 3B Instruct?

Claude Opus 4.1, with 200K tokens against 131K.

How many benchmarks is the Claude Opus 4.1 vs Llama 3.2 3B Instruct comparison based on?

24 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. Claude Opus 4.1's coding index rests on 1 independent benchmark and Llama 3.2 3B Instruct's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next