This paper proposes a detailed prompting flow, termed Table-Logic, to investigate the performance contrasts between bigger and smaller language models (LMs) utilizing step-by-step reasoning methods in the TableQA task. The method processes tasks by sequentially identifying critical columns and rows given question and table with its structure, determining necessary aggregations, calculations, or comparisons, and finally inferring the results to generate a precise prediction. By deploying this method, we observe a 7.8% accuracy improvement in bigger LMs like Llama-3-70B compared to the vanilla on HybridQA, while smaller LMs like Llama-2-7B shows an 11% performance decline. We empirically investigate the potential causes of performance contrasts by exploring the capabilities of bigger and smaller LMs from various dimensions in TableQA task. Our findings highlight the limitations of the step-by-step reasoning method in small models and provide potential insights for making improvements.