Not normally... indeed, many mathematicians would say "never" (while others, particularly elementary school math teaching experts, would say "sometimes".)

It depends on whether you consider multiplication to be a primitive function, commutative by definition, or whether it "is" repeated addition and "just happens" to be commutative - a distinction that perhaps we need not worry about too much!

The "elementary teacher" view is that (eg) 2x3 means 3+3 while
3x2 means 2+2+2. In advanced math we think of it as counting pairs, one element taken from a set of 2 objects and one from a set of 3; so the set
{a,b} x {C,D,E} has elements {(a,C),(a,D),(a,E),(b,C),(b,D),(b,E)}. These two definitions always give the same answer!

If the picture suggests an inner grouping, like

[* * *] [* * *]

then with the repeated addition definition this would be 2x3 and not 3x2. If we use the counting-pairs definition both are right.

If the picture is

* * *
* * *
then - unless there is a convention otherwise, to the effect that rows will be considered to be inner groups, in the course - both are right.

Good Hunting!
RD