Model comparison
Claude 3.5 Sonnet vs Olmo 3 32b Think
Olmo 3 32b Think is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.1 to 34.4 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 14 shared benchmarks.
Allen Institute for AI (Ai2)Summary
- They share 14 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude 3.5 Sonnet scores higher in 5 categories and Olmo 3 32b Think in 3 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Olmo 3 32b Think leads 33.8 to 18.0.
- Olmo 3 32b Think has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Claude 3.5 Sonnet | Olmo 3 32b Think | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | Allen Institute for AI (Ai2) |
| Noometry Index | 34.4 | 38.1 |
| Released | 2024-06-20 | — |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | — | — |
| Max output | — | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Results tracked | 60 | 14 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Claude 3.5 Sonnet leads
Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 39.5 (#145), Olmo 3 32b Think: 38.0 (#169)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1343 | 1318 |
| Aider Polyglot | 51.6% | — |
| GSO | 4.6% | — |
| WeirdML | 40% | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 46.8% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 67.1% | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 58.6% | — |
| CadEval | 48% | — |
| HumanEval+ | 81.7% | — |
| MBPP+ | 74.3% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 32.1 (#61), Olmo 3 32b Think: —
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| TheAgentCompany | 24% | — |
| Cybench | 17.5% | — |
| BALROG | 32.6% | — |
| METR Time Horizons | 45.2% | — |
Reasoning Olmo 3 32b Think leads
Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 22.5 (#176), Olmo 3 32b Think: 24.9 (#138)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1305 | 1302 |
| SimpleBench | 41.4% | — |
| EnigmaEval | 0.9% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 56.7% | — |
| DTBench | 67.8% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 55% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 133.55 | — |
| ForecastBench | 60.7 | — |
| LiveBench | 59% | — |
Math Olmo 3 32b Think leads
Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 18.0 (#282), Olmo 3 32b Think: 33.8 (#165)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1306 | 1315 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 8.5% | — |
| Omni-MATH | 27.6% | — |
| LiveBench Math | 52.3% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 56.9% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 2.1% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 0% | — |
Knowledge Olmo 3 32b Think leads
Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 28.5 (#236), Olmo 3 32b Think: 34.4 (#189)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1264 | 1272 |
| GPQA Diamond | 55.3% | — |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 4.1% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | 77.7% | — |
| Confabulations | 19.9% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 56.5% | — |
| MMLU | 87.3% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 26.0 (#115), Olmo 3 32b Think: —
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1125 | — |
| Video-MME | 60% | — |
| GeoBench | 62% | — |
| VPCT | 33% | — |
Multilingual Claude 3.5 Sonnet leads
Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 43.4 (#180), Olmo 3 32b Think: 41.4 (#205)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1283 | 1255 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1271 | 1300 |
| LMArena French | 1304 | 1291 |
| LMArena German | 1297 | 1290 |
| LMArena Russian | 1305 | 1255 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1234 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1200 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1289 | — |
Instruction Following Claude 3.5 Sonnet leads
Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 69.0 (#177), Olmo 3 32b Think: 67.4 (#193)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1297 | 1275 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 69.3% | — |
| IFEval | 85.5% | — |
Long Context Too close to call
Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 39.9 (#162), Olmo 3 32b Think: 39.4 (#177)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1311 | 1296 |
Writing & Preference Claude 3.5 Sonnet leads
Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 53.0 (#159), Olmo 3 32b Think: 49.2 (#188)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1298 | 1300 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1292 | 1256 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1326 | 1289 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 80.3% | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1451 | — |
| WildBench | 79.2% | — |
| LiveBench Language | 53.8% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Claude 3.5 Sonnet better than Olmo 3 32b Think?
Olmo 3 32b Think is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.1 to 34.4 on the Noometry Index.
Is Claude 3.5 Sonnet or Olmo 3 32b Think better for coding?
Claude 3.5 Sonnet scores higher on coding benchmarks: 39.5 versus 38.0 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Claude 3.5 Sonnet and Olmo 3 32b Think share?
14 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude 3.5 Sonnet has 60 scored results on Noometry and Olmo 3 32b Think has 14.