+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
GPT OSS 20B vs Llama 3.2 90B Instruct
Comprehensive side-by-side LLM comparison
GPT OSS 20B leads with 12.1% higher average benchmark score. GPT OSS 20B offers 6.1K more tokens in context window than Llama 3.2 90B Instruct. Both models have similar pricing. Llama 3.2 90B Instruct supports multimodal inputs. Overall, GPT OSS 20B is the stronger choice for coding tasks.
+
+
+
+
OpenAI
GPT-OSS 20B was created as a smaller open-source variant, designed to balance capability with accessibility for researchers and developers. Built with 20 billion parameters, it provides a more approachable entry point for those seeking to work with open-source language models while benefiting from OpenAI's architectural insights.
+
+
+
+
Meta
Llama 3.2 90B was developed as a flagship-tier open-source model, designed to provide advanced capabilities with 90 billion parameters. Built to serve applications requiring high-quality reasoning and generation, it represents a powerful option within the Llama 3.2 series for demanding tasks.
10 months newer
Llama 3.2 90B Instruct
Meta
2024-09-25
GPT OSS 20B
OpenAI
2025-08-05
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
Pricing Comparison
Cost per million tokens (USD)
+
+
+
+
GPT OSS 20B
Input:$0.05
Output:$0.20($0.50 cheaper)
+
+
+
+
Llama 3.2 90B Instruct
Input:$0.35
Output:$0.40
Performance Metrics
Context window and performance specifications
Average performance across 2 common benchmarks
+
+
+
+
GPT OSS 20B
Average Score:78.4%(+12.1%)
+
+
+
+
Llama 3.2 90B Instruct
Average Score:66.3%
Provider Availability & Performance
Available providers and their performance metrics
+
+
+
+
GPT OSS 20B
4 providers
Groq
Throughput: 1000 tok/s
Latency: 0.38ms
Novita
OpenAI
Throughput: 115 tok/s
Latency: 5.2ms
ZeroEval
Throughput: 1000 tok/s
Latency: 0.38ms
+
+
+
+
+
+
GPT OSS 20B
Avg Score:78.4%(+12.1%)
Providers:4
+
+
+
+
Llama 3.2 90B Instruct
Avg Score:66.3%
Providers:5