+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
Llama 3.2 3B Instruct vs o1
Comprehensive side-by-side LLM comparison
o1 leads with 34.5% higher average benchmark score. o1 offers 44.0K more tokens in context window than Llama 3.2 3B Instruct. Llama 3.2 3B Instruct is $74.97 cheaper per million tokens. Overall, o1 is the stronger choice for coding tasks.
+
+
+
+
Meta
Llama 3.2 3B was created as an ultra-compact open-source model, designed to enable on-device and edge deployment scenarios. Built with just 3 billion parameters while retaining instruction-following abilities, it brings Meta's language technology to mobile devices, IoT applications, and resource-constrained environments.
+
+
+
+
OpenAI
o1 was developed as part of OpenAI's reasoning-focused model series, designed to spend more time thinking before responding. Built to excel at complex reasoning tasks in science, coding, and mathematics, it employs extended internal reasoning processes to solve harder problems than traditional language models through careful step-by-step analysis.
2 months newer
Llama 3.2 3B Instruct
Meta
2024-09-25
o1
OpenAI
2024-12-17
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
Pricing Comparison
Cost per million tokens (USD)
+
+
+
+
Llama 3.2 3B Instruct
Input:$0.01
Output:$0.02($74.97 cheaper)
+
+
+
+
o1
Input:$15.00
Output:$60.00
Performance Metrics
Context window and performance specifications
Average performance across 5 common benchmarks
+
+
+
+
Llama 3.2 3B Instruct
Average Score:56.0%
+
+
+
+
o1
Average Score:90.5%(+34.5%)
Provider Availability & Performance
Available providers and their performance metrics
+
+
+
+
Llama 3.2 3B Instruct
1 providers
DeepInfra
Throughput: 171.5 tok/s
Latency: 0.24ms
+
+
+
+
o1
+
+
+
+
Llama 3.2 3B Instruct
Avg Score:56.0%
Providers:1
+
+
+
+
o1
Avg Score:90.5%(+34.5%)
Providers:2