Llama 3.2 1B Instruct vs Step 3.7 Flash
Updated October 21, 2026. 7 benchmarks have a result for both. Coding is ranked on the Vibe Coding Index; every other board is shown as published.
Decision reading
Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.
Llama 3.2 1B Instruct has the edge where output tokens cost 5.7x less, and where what matters is Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) or AA Intelligence Index, where it leads.
- Shared results
- 7
- Llama 3.2 1B Instruct only
- 30
- Step 3.7 Flash only
- 11
- Like-for-like categories
- 5 of 9
Shared results can support a head-to-head reading. Results only one model has describe coverage, not superiority.
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.
Coding
Vibe Coding Index, six public coding benchmarks
No call
Neither has a coding score yet.
One side not measured
Intelligence
AA Intelligence Index
Step 3.7 Flash
Step 3.7 Flash leads, 19.5 against 4.8.
Same board, both measured
Web design
Design Arena: websites
No call
Only Step 3.7 Flash has a Design Arena: websites result, 1196.
Directional only
Long documents
Listed context window
Step 3.7 Flash
Step 3.7 Flash takes 262K tokens against 60K.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Llama 3.2 1B Instruct
Llama 3.2 1B Instruct $0.0001, Step 3.7 Flash $0.0008 per turn.
List prices
At a glance
- Coding index
- Llama 3.2 1B Instruct not benchmarked, Step 3.7 Flash not benchmarked.
- Widest category
- Agentic work, 98.5 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
- Widest single gap
- τ²-Bench Telecom: Llama 3.2 1B Instruct 0.0% against Step 3.7 Flash 98.5%, 98.5 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
- Output price
- Llama 3.2 1B Instruct $0.201 against Step 3.7 Flash $1.15 per million output tokens, 5.7x apart.
- Context window
- Llama 3.2 1B Instruct takes 60K tokens, Step 3.7 Flash 262K.
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.
| Category | Llama 3.2 1B Instruct | Bars | Step 3.7 Flash | Ties |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | 0 | 1 | ||
| Intelligence | 0 | 1 | ||
| Agentic work | 0 | 1 | ||
| Reasoning | 0 | 2 | ||
| General | 0 | 2 | ||
| All shared boards | 0 | 7 |
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index01
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B Instruct | Step 3.7 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Coding Index | Not measured | 39.6 | Only Step 3.7 Flash measured |
| LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run) | 1.9% | Not measured | Only Llama 3.2 1B Instruct measured |
| SciCode | Not measured | 43.9% | Only Step 3.7 Flash measured |
| Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) | 0.0% | 35.6% | Step 3.7 Flash |
| ALE-Bench | Not measured | 694.1 | Only Step 3.7 Flash measured |
| LMArena Text: coding | 1070 | Not measured | Only Llama 3.2 1B Instruct measured |
| LMArena Text: software and IT | 1056 | Not measured | Only Llama 3.2 1B Instruct measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 31 boards here | |||
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B Instruct | Step 3.7 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | 4.8 | 19.5 | Step 3.7 Flash |
| Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here | |||
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B Instruct | Step 3.7 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| τ²-Bench Telecom | 0.0% | 98.5% | Step 3.7 Flash |
| BALROG | 6.6% | Not measured | Only Llama 3.2 1B Instruct measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 37 boards here | |||
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B Instruct | Step 3.7 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) | 19.6% | 80.9% | Step 3.7 Flash |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run) | 5.5% | 21.4% | Step 3.7 Flash |
| GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run) | 23.9% | Not measured | Only Llama 3.2 1B Instruct measured |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts | 1044 | Not measured | Only Llama 3.2 1B Instruct measured |
| LMArena Text: expert | 1007 | Not measured | Only Llama 3.2 1B Instruct measured |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts in English | 1087 | Not measured | Only Llama 3.2 1B Instruct measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 15 boards here | |||
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index5 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B Instruct | Step 3.7 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Math Index | 0.0 | Not measured | Only Llama 3.2 1B Instruct measured |
| AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run) | 0.0% | Not measured | Only Llama 3.2 1B Instruct measured |
| OTIS Mock AIME | 0.6% | Not measured | Only Llama 3.2 1B Instruct measured |
| LMArena Text: math | 1086 | Not measured | Only Llama 3.2 1B Instruct measured |
| LMArena Text: mathematical work | 1098 | Not measured | Only Llama 3.2 1B Instruct measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 8 boards here | |||
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index5 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B Instruct | Step 3.7 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run) | 20.0% | Not measured | Only Llama 3.2 1B Instruct measured |
| LMArena Text: science | 1055 | Not measured | Only Llama 3.2 1B Instruct measured |
| LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare | 1009 | Not measured | Only Llama 3.2 1B Instruct measured |
| LMArena Text: legal and government | 1071 | Not measured | Only Llama 3.2 1B Instruct measured |
| LMArena Text: business and finance | 1000 | Not measured | Only Llama 3.2 1B Instruct measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 12 boards here | |||
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index8 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B Instruct | Step 3.7 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena: websites | Not measured | 1196 | Only Step 3.7 Flash measured |
| Design Arena: UI components | Not measured | 1179 | Only Step 3.7 Flash measured |
| Design Arena: game dev | Not measured | 1158 | Only Step 3.7 Flash measured |
| Design Arena: data viz | Not measured | 1172 | Only Step 3.7 Flash measured |
| Design Arena: 3D | Not measured | 1129 | Only Step 3.7 Flash measured |
| Design Arena: all code categories | Not measured | 1182 | Only Step 3.7 Flash measured |
| Design Arena: SVG | Not measured | 1085 | Only Step 3.7 Flash measured |
| Design Arena: ASCII art | Not measured | 1152 | Only Step 3.7 Flash measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here | |||
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B Instruct | Step 3.7 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| IFBench | 22.8% | 67.3% | Step 3.7 Flash |
| Long context reasoning (AA-LCR) | 6.7% | 73.7% | Step 3.7 Flash |
| LMArena Text | 1055 | Not measured | Only Llama 3.2 1B Instruct measured |
| LMArena Text: instruction following | 1031 | Not measured | Only Llama 3.2 1B Instruct measured |
| LMArena Text: creative writing | 1033 | Not measured | Only Llama 3.2 1B Instruct measured |
| LMArena Text: English | 1117 | Not measured | Only Llama 3.2 1B Instruct measured |
| LMArena Text: non-English | 973 | Not measured | Only Llama 3.2 1B Instruct measured |
| LMArena Text: Chinese | 959 | Not measured | Only Llama 3.2 1B Instruct measured |
| LMArena Text: German | 1014 | Not measured | Only Llama 3.2 1B Instruct measured |
| LMArena Text: Russian | 941 | Not measured | Only Llama 3.2 1B Instruct measured |
| LMArena Text: multi-turn | 1030 | Not measured | Only Llama 3.2 1B Instruct measured |
| LMArena Text: longer queries | 1050 | Not measured | Only Llama 3.2 1B Instruct measured |
| LMArena Text: writing and language | 1030 | Not measured | Only Llama 3.2 1B Instruct measured |
| LMArena Text: entertainment and media | 1025 | Not measured | Only Llama 3.2 1B Instruct measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 32 boards here | |||
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B Instruct | Step 3.7 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| 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 3.2 1B Instruct costs less
Repository review
50K input + 3K output tokens
Llama 3.2 1B Instruct costs less
Agent loop
200K input + 10K output tokens
Llama 3.2 1B 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.
| Specification | Meta Llama 3.2 1B Instruct | StepFun Step 3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | Meta Llama | StepFun |
| Weights | Open weights | Open weights |
| Released | September 25, 2024 | May 28, 2026 |
| Context window | 60K | 262K |
| Input $/Mtok | $0.027 | $0.20 |
| Output $/Mtok | $0.201 | $1.15 |
| Coding index | Not benchmarked | Not benchmarked |
| Independent measurements behind it | 0 | 0 |
| Cost per solved task | Not computable | Not computable |
| Source | OpenRouter listing | OpenRouter listing |
Questions
Is Llama 3.2 1B Instruct better than Step 3.7 Flash for coding?
Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Llama 3.2 1B Instruct has the edge where output tokens cost 5.7x less, and where what matters is Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) or AA Intelligence Index, where it leads.
Which is cheaper, Llama 3.2 1B Instruct or Step 3.7 Flash?
Llama 3.2 1B Instruct costs $0.027 per million input tokens and $0.201 per million output tokens; Step 3.7 Flash costs $0.20 and $1.15. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.
Which has the bigger context window, Llama 3.2 1B Instruct or Step 3.7 Flash?
Step 3.7 Flash, with 262K tokens against 60K.
How many benchmarks is the Llama 3.2 1B Instruct vs Step 3.7 Flash comparison based on?
7 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. Llama 3.2 1B Instruct's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and Step 3.7 Flash's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.