Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Llama 3.1 8B Instruct vs Llama 3.2 3B Instruct

Llama 3.1 8B Instruct leads Llama 3.2 3B Instruct on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 6.9 to 5.7, and Llama 3.1 8B Instruct costs 4.2x less per output token ($0.08 vs $0.3325 per million). Updated October 21, 2026; 35 benchmarks have a result for both.

Llama 3.1 8B InstructMeta Llama
Coding
No data
Overall
17.9
Output $/M
$0.08
33
Llama 3.2 3B InstructMeta Llama
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.3325
1
vs boards won of 35 shared, 1 tied

Llama 3.1 8B Instruct 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 Llama 3.1 8B Instruct for output tokens 4.2x cheaper ($0.08 vs $0.3325 per million) and work measured by τ²-Bench Telecom, where it leads.

Shared results
35
Llama 3.1 8B Instruct only
16
Llama 3.2 3B Instruct only
0
Like-for-like categories
7 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
Llama 3.1 8B Instruct not benchmarked, Llama 3.2 3B Instruct not benchmarked.
Widest category
Knowledge, 14.2 points apart on average over 5 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
LMArena Text: Russian: Llama 3.1 8B Instruct 1158 against Llama 3.2 3B Instruct 949, 26.4 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Llama 3.1 8B Instruct $0.08 against Llama 3.2 3B Instruct $0.3325 per million output tokens, 4.2x apart.
Context window
Both take 131K tokens.

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
CategoryLlama 3.1 8B InstructBarsLlama 3.2 3B InstructTies
Coding30
Intelligence10
Agentic work21
Reasoning401 tie
Math40
Knowledge50
General140
All shared boards3311 tie
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index30
Coding benchmarks for Llama 3.1 8B Instruct and Llama 3.2 3B Instruct
BenchmarkLlama 3.1 8B InstructLlama 3.2 3B InstructLeader
AA Coding Index5.4Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)11.6%8.3%Llama 3.1 8B Instruct
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)0.8%Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
WeirdML1.7%Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: coding11951098Llama 3.1 8B Instruct
LMArena Text: software and IT11951103Llama 3.1 8B Instruct
Neither model has a result on the other 33 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Intelligence benchmarks for Llama 3.1 8B Instruct and Llama 3.2 3B Instruct
BenchmarkLlama 3.1 8B InstructLlama 3.2 3B InstructLeader
AA Intelligence Index6.95.7Llama 3.1 8B Instruct
Epoch Capabilities Index116.5Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index21
Agentic work benchmarks for Llama 3.1 8B Instruct and Llama 3.2 3B Instruct
BenchmarkLlama 3.1 8B InstructLlama 3.2 3B InstructLeader
τ²-Bench Telecom16.4%21.1%Llama 3.2 3B Instruct
BALROG15.1%10.1%Llama 3.1 8B Instruct
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL)25.8%21.9%Llama 3.1 8B Instruct
Neither model has a result on the other 38 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index40
Reasoning benchmarks for Llama 3.1 8B Instruct and Llama 3.2 3B Instruct
BenchmarkLlama 3.1 8B InstructLlama 3.2 3B InstructLeader
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)25.9%25.5%Llama 3.1 8B Instruct
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)5.3%5.3%Tie
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)27.0%Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts11751095Llama 3.1 8B Instruct
LMArena Text: expert11441090Llama 3.1 8B Instruct
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English11961141Llama 3.1 8B Instruct
Neither model has a result on the other 16 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index40
Math benchmarks for Llama 3.1 8B Instruct and Llama 3.2 3B Instruct
BenchmarkLlama 3.1 8B InstructLlama 3.2 3B InstructLeader
AA Math Index4.33.3Llama 3.1 8B Instruct
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)4.3%3.3%Llama 3.1 8B Instruct
OTIS Mock AIME1.7%Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
MATH level 522.9%Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
GSM8K82.4%Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: math11791126Llama 3.1 8B Instruct
LMArena Text: mathematical work11801128Llama 3.1 8B Instruct
Neither model has a result on the other 6 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index50
Knowledge benchmarks for Llama 3.1 8B Instruct and Llama 3.2 3B Instruct
BenchmarkLlama 3.1 8B InstructLlama 3.2 3B InstructLeader
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)47.6%34.7%Llama 3.1 8B Instruct
MMLU56.1%Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: science11931106Llama 3.1 8B Instruct
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare11821104Llama 3.1 8B Instruct
LMArena Text: legal and government12061115Llama 3.1 8B Instruct
LMArena Text: business and finance11661074Llama 3.1 8B Instruct
Neither model has a result on the other 12 boards here
Web designNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for Llama 3.1 8B Instruct and Llama 3.2 3B Instruct
BenchmarkLlama 3.1 8B InstructLlama 3.2 3B InstructLeader
Neither model has a result on 9 boards here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index140
General benchmarks for Llama 3.1 8B Instruct and Llama 3.2 3B Instruct
BenchmarkLlama 3.1 8B InstructLlama 3.2 3B InstructLeader
IFBench28.6%26.2%Llama 3.1 8B Instruct
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)18.0%4.3%Llama 3.1 8B Instruct
DTBench50.9%Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMCA5.4%Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
PIQA81.2%Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text11871110Llama 3.1 8B Instruct
LMArena Text: instruction following11591089Llama 3.1 8B Instruct
LMArena Text: creative writing11541094Llama 3.1 8B Instruct
LMArena Text: English12181180Llama 3.1 8B Instruct
LMArena Text: non-English11481019Llama 3.1 8B Instruct
LMArena Text: Chinese11511017Llama 3.1 8B Instruct
LMArena Text: German11441056Llama 3.1 8B Instruct
LMArena Text: Japanese1061Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: Korean1053Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: French1178Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: Spanish1169Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: Russian1158949Llama 3.1 8B Instruct
LMArena Text: multi-turn11721105Llama 3.1 8B Instruct
LMArena Text: longer queries11811100Llama 3.1 8B Instruct
LMArena Text: writing and language11621096Llama 3.1 8B Instruct
LMArena Text: entertainment and media11451083Llama 3.1 8B Instruct
Neither model has a result on the other 25 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for Llama 3.1 8B Instruct and Llama 3.2 3B Instruct
BenchmarkLlama 3.1 8B InstructLlama 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

Llama 3.1 8B Instruct$0.0001Fits in one request
Llama 3.2 3B Instruct$0.0002Fits in one request

Llama 3.1 8B Instruct costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Llama 3.1 8B Instruct$0.0027Fits in one request
Llama 3.2 3B Instruct$0.0035Fits in one request

Llama 3.1 8B Instruct costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Llama 3.1 8B Instruct$0.011Exceeds the context window
Llama 3.2 3B Instruct$0.013Exceeds the context window

Llama 3.1 8B 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 Llama 3.1 8B Instruct and Llama 3.2 3B Instruct
SpecificationMeta Llama 3.1 8B InstructMeta Llama 3.2 3B Instruct
MakerMeta LlamaMeta Llama
WeightsOpen weightsOpen weights
ReleasedJuly 23, 2024September 25, 2024
Context window131K131K
Input $/Mtok$0.05$0.0505
Output $/Mtok$0.08$0.3325
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it00
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Llama 3.1 8B Instruct 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 Llama 3.1 8B Instruct for output tokens 4.2x cheaper ($0.08 vs $0.3325 per million) and work measured by τ²-Bench Telecom, where it leads.

Which is cheaper, Llama 3.1 8B Instruct or Llama 3.2 3B Instruct?

Llama 3.1 8B Instruct costs $0.05 per million input tokens and $0.08 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, Llama 3.1 8B Instruct or Llama 3.2 3B Instruct?

Neither: both take 131K tokens.

How many benchmarks is the Llama 3.1 8B Instruct vs Llama 3.2 3B Instruct comparison based on?

35 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. Llama 3.1 8B Instruct's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks 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