Noometry

Model comparison

Claude Opus 5.5 vs Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct

Claude Opus 5.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 68.5 to 38.8 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 11 shared benchmarks.

Claude Opus 5.5 Anthropic

68.5

Rank #3 Confirmed

Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct Allen Institute for AI (Ai2)

38.8

Rank #168 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 11 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 5.5 scores higher in 8 categories and Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where Claude Opus 5.5 leads 92.4 to 33.6.
  • Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Claude Opus 5.5Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct
ProviderAnthropicAllen Institute for AI (Ai2)
Noometry Index68.538.8
Released2026-09-22—
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1M—
Max output128K—
Input $ / M tokens$4—
Output $ / M tokens$20—
Results tracked3516

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 71.4 (#1), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 38.9 (#154)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct
LMArena Coding15451346
FrontierCode54.4%—
CursorBench57.8%—
LMArena WebDev1820—
FrontierSWE62.3%—
SciCode66.9%—
MirrorCode77.4%—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Claude Opus 5.5: 45.3 (#13), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct
APEX-Agents73.5%—
GDP.pdf30.6%—

Reasoning Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 79.5 (#2), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 25.4 (#131)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct
LMArena Hard Prompts15451322
ARC-AGI-292.5%—
NYT Connections (extended)88.5%—
ARC-AGI-197.5%—
CritPt31.7%—
EBR-Bench71.4%—
Mystery Game Puzzles71%—
DTBench98.9%—
LMCA68.2%—

Math Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 92.4 (#2), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 33.6 (#169)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)91.2%—
FrontierMath Tier 495%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025100%—
ProofBench100%—
LMArena Math—1305

Knowledge Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 66.6 (#9), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 35.4 (#175)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct
LMArena Expert15641307
GPQA Diamond90.6%—
SimpleQA Verified72.2%—

Multimodal Not comparable

Claude Opus 5.5: 56.5 (#2), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct
Furniture Assembly83.3%—

Multilingual Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 59.8 (#1), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 42.8 (#185)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct
LMArena Non-English15131275
LMArena Chinese15721304
LMArena Russian15321268
LMArena French—1328
LMArena German—1283
LMArena Korean—1206
LMArena Spanish—1337

Instruction Following Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 80.1 (#2), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 68.8 (#182)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct
LMArena Instruction Following15351298

Long Context Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 47.3 (#18), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 39.9 (#161)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct
LMArena Longer Query15401312

Writing & Preference Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 78.7 (#3), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 50.4 (#179)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct
LMArena Text15181311
LMArena Creative Writing15381264
LMArena Multi-Turn15201309
EQ-Bench Creative Writing2050—

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Opus 5.5 better than Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct?

Claude Opus 5.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 68.5 to 38.8 on the Noometry Index.

Is Claude Opus 5.5 or Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct better for coding?

Claude Opus 5.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 71.4 versus 38.9 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 5.5 and Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct share?

11 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 5.5 has 35 scored results on Noometry and Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct has 16.

Related comparisons

Go deeper