Model comparison
Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs Olmo 3 32b Think
Claude Sonnet 4.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 44.1 to 38.7 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 Sonnet 4.5 scores higher in 7 categories and Olmo 3 32b Think in 1 category; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Claude Sonnet 4.5 leads 66.5 to 49.1.
- Olmo 3 32b Think has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Claude Sonnet 4.5 | Olmo 3 32b Think | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | Allen Institute for AI (Ai2) |
| Noometry Index | 44.1 | 38.7 |
| Released | 2025-09-29 | — |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 200K | — |
| Max output | 64K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $3 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $15 | — |
| Results tracked | 73 | 14 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Claude Sonnet 4.5 leads
Claude Sonnet 4.5: 47.3 (#61), Olmo 3 32b Think: 38.6 (#172)
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 4.5 | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1489 | 1319 |
| SWE-bench Verified | 71.3% | — |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 71.4% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1393 | — |
| SWE-bench Multilingual | 67% | — |
| SciCode | 44.7% | — |
| GSO | 14.7% | — |
| WeirdML | 47.7% | — |
| ALE-Bench | 796.15 | — |
| AlgoTune | 1.52 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Claude Sonnet 4.5: 38.3 (#32), Olmo 3 32b Think: —
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 4.5 | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | 46.5% | — |
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 73.2% | — |
| GDPval | 42.5% | — |
| Remote Labor Index | 2.1% | — |
| τ²-bench Airline | 72% | — |
| τ²-bench Banking | 25.3% | — |
| τ²-bench Retail | 72.4% | — |
| τ²-bench Telecom | 84.9% | — |
| Cybench | 60% | — |
| DeepResearch Bench | 52.6% | — |
| OSWorld | 62.9% | — |
| LMArena Search | 1159 | — |
| METR Time Horizons | 67.4% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 3,839 | — |
Reasoning Claude Sonnet 4.5 leads
Claude Sonnet 4.5: 26.9 (#125), Olmo 3 32b Think: 25.9 (#140)
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 4.5 | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1462 | 1302 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 13.6% | — |
| SimpleBench | 54.3% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 57.9% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 37.3% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 63.7% | — |
| CritPt | 1.1% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 12% | — |
| EnigmaEval | 6% | — |
| EBR-Bench | 2.4% | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 17% | — |
| DTBench | 83.2% | — |
| LMCA | 38.8% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 146.84 | — |
| ForecastBench | 61.9 | — |
Math Olmo 3 32b Think leads
Claude Sonnet 4.5: 32.3 (#216), Olmo 3 32b Think: 36.5 (#165)
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 4.5 | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1449 | 1316 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 23.9% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 2.4% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 77.8% | — |
| ProofBench | 19% | — |
| Omni-MATH | 55.3% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 97.7% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 15.2% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 4.2% | — |
Knowledge Claude Sonnet 4.5 leads
Claude Sonnet 4.5: 48.4 (#76), Olmo 3 32b Think: 35.0 (#190)
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 4.5 | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1482 | 1273 |
| GPQA Diamond | 82.3% | — |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 13.7% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | 30.7% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | 86.9% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 12% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 68.6% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Claude Sonnet 4.5: 34.8 (#89), Olmo 3 32b Think: —
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 4.5 | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| VPCT | 39.8% | — |
| LMArena Document | 1450 | — |
Multilingual Claude Sonnet 4.5 leads
Claude Sonnet 4.5: 53.4 (#69), Olmo 3 32b Think: 41.2 (#210)
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 4.5 | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1425 | 1255 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1459 | 1300 |
| LMArena French | 1458 | 1291 |
| LMArena German | 1427 | 1290 |
| LMArena Russian | 1437 | 1254 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1390 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1403 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1457 | — |
Instruction Following Claude Sonnet 4.5 leads
Claude Sonnet 4.5: 75.0 (#78), Olmo 3 32b Think: 67.2 (#198)
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 4.5 | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1459 | 1275 |
| IFEval | 85% | — |
Long Context Claude Sonnet 4.5 leads
Claude Sonnet 4.5: 45.2 (#46), Olmo 3 32b Think: 39.4 (#182)
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 4.5 | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1476 | 1296 |
Writing & Preference Claude Sonnet 4.5 leads
Claude Sonnet 4.5: 66.5 (#34), Olmo 3 32b Think: 49.1 (#193)
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 4.5 | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1439 | 1300 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1442 | 1256 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1465 | 1290 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1678 | — |
| WildBench | 85.4% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Claude Sonnet 4.5 better than Olmo 3 32b Think?
Claude Sonnet 4.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 44.1 to 38.7 on the Noometry Index.
Is Claude Sonnet 4.5 or Olmo 3 32b Think better for coding?
Claude Sonnet 4.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 47.3 versus 38.6 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Claude Sonnet 4.5 and Olmo 3 32b Think share?
14 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Sonnet 4.5 has 73 scored results on Noometry and Olmo 3 32b Think has 14.