Model comparison
Claude Opus 5 vs Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct
Claude Opus 5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 67.8 to 32.7 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 11 shared benchmarks.
Allen Institute for AI (Ai2)Summary
- They share 11 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 5 scores higher in 8 categories and Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Claude Opus 5 leads 86.2 to 26.8.
- Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Claude Opus 5 | Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | Allen Institute for AI (Ai2) |
| Noometry Index | 67.8 | 32.7 |
| Released | 2026-07-24 | — |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 1M | — |
| Max output | 128K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $5 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $25 | — |
| Results tracked | 57 | 16 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Claude Opus 5 leads
Claude Opus 5: 67.5 (#5), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 35.2 (#227)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5 | Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1534 | 1210 |
| DeepSWE | 73.6% | — |
| FrontierCode | 53.4% | — |
| CursorBench | 46.6% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1691 | — |
| FrontierSWE | 52% | — |
| SciCode | 56.4% | — |
| WeirdML | 91.8% | — |
| ALE-Bench | 2,165 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Claude Opus 5: 55.6 (#1), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: —
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5 | Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | 65.8% | — |
| OSWorld 2.0 | 31.4% | — |
| τ²-bench Banking | 48.7% | — |
| PostTrainBench | 35% | — |
| BALROG | 63.4% | — |
| GBAEval | 79.6% | — |
| GDP.pdf | 24% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 11,182 | — |
Reasoning Claude Opus 5 leads
Claude Opus 5: 77.2 (#4), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 23.6 (#175)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5 | Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1526 | 1208 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 90.4% | — |
| SimpleBench | 80.6% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 94.3% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 97.5% | — |
| CritPt | 29.1% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 42% | — |
| EBR-Bench | 45.7% | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 59% | — |
| DTBench | 97.9% | — |
| LMCA | 64.5% | — |
| Bench to the Future 3 | 0.12 | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 162.78 | — |
Math Claude Opus 5 leads
Claude Opus 5: 86.2 (#8), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 26.8 (#255)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5 | Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1531 | 1208 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 85.6% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 73.2% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 98.9% | — |
| ProofBench | 99% | — |
| Omni-MATH | — | 16.1% |
Knowledge Claude Opus 5 leads
Claude Opus 5: 66.8 (#9), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 19.5 (#279)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5 | Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 93.9% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | 59.9% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | — | 41.4% |
| GPQA (HELM) | — | 28.7% |
| LMArena Expert | 1557 | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Claude Opus 5: 50.8 (#8), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: —
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5 | Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1319 | — |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | 30.4% | — |
| Furniture Assembly | 60.8% | — |
| LMArena Document | 1516 | — |
Multilingual Claude Opus 5 leads
Claude Opus 5: 58.8 (#4), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 34.8 (#248)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5 | Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1501 | 1160 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1574 | 1192 |
| LMArena Russian | 1507 | 1187 |
| LMArena French | 1519 | — |
| LMArena German | 1524 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1516 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1521 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1519 | — |
Instruction Following Claude Opus 5 leads
Claude Opus 5: 79.2 (#7), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 61.5 (#244)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5 | Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1517 | 1186 |
| IFEval | — | 78% |
Long Context Claude Opus 5 leads
Claude Opus 5: 46.5 (#21), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 36.2 (#234)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5 | Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1515 | 1194 |
Writing & Preference Claude Opus 5 leads
Claude Opus 5: 79.2 (#1), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 42.1 (#236)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5 | Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1507 | 1218 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1491 | 1199 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1499 | 1221 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 2133 | — |
| WildBench | — | 73.4% |
| EQ-Bench 4 | 1385 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Claude Opus 5 better than Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct?
Claude Opus 5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 67.8 to 32.7 on the Noometry Index.
Is Claude Opus 5 or Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct better for coding?
Claude Opus 5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 67.5 versus 35.2 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 5 and Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct share?
11 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 5 has 57 scored results on Noometry and Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct has 16.