Meta Llama 3-7 DS vs Mistral Ministral 3 14B Instruct 2512
Detailed comparison for LLMs
On Guardion's LLM vulnerability Benchmark, Meta Llama 3-7 DS is the more secure of the two: Llama 3-7 DS scores 32.2% and Ministral 3 14B Instruct 2512 scores 44.0% on attack success rate (ASR) (lower is better). One or both scores are estimated from public safety evaluations pending a Guardion benchmark run.
Head-to-Head Overview
Llama 3-7 DS is the overall winner in this comparison!
Attack Success Rate (lower is safer)
ASR for Meta Llama 3-7 DS vs Mistral Ministral 3 14B Instruct 2512. Green marks the safer model on each metric. Only the overall score is available for estimated models.
Overall (ASR)
TAP Attack Method (ASR)
Crescendo Attack Method (ASR)
Zero-Shot (ASR)
Key Highlights
- Meta Llama 3-7 DS has a lower Overall (ASR).
- Meta Llama 3-7 DS has a lower Zero-Shot (ASR).
Security Profile
Outward is better on every axis.
Frequently asked questions
Is Meta Llama 3-7 DS or Mistral Ministral 3 14B Instruct 2512 more secure?
On Guardion's LLM vulnerability Benchmark, Meta Llama 3-7 DS is the more secure of the two: Llama 3-7 DS scores 32.2% and Ministral 3 14B Instruct 2512 scores 44.0% on attack success rate (ASR) (lower is better). One or both scores are estimated from public safety evaluations pending a Guardion benchmark run.
What is the attack success rate (ASR) of Llama 3-7 DS vs Ministral 3 14B Instruct 2512?
Llama 3-7 DS has a 32.2% ASR and Ministral 3 14B Instruct 2512 has a 44.0% ASR — the share of adversarial prompts that succeed across zero-shot, TAP, and Crescendo attacks. Lower is safer.
How were Llama 3-7 DS and Ministral 3 14B Instruct 2512 tested?
Both were red-teamed with the HarmBench framework across zero-shot, TAP (Tree of Attacks with Pruning), and Crescendo multi-turn attacks, scored by Attack Success Rate.