Noometry

Model comparison

Claude Sonnet 5.5 vs Olmo 3.1 32b Think

Claude Sonnet 5.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 61.9 to 37.9 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 12 shared benchmarks.

Claude Sonnet 5.5 Anthropic

61.9

Rank #10 Confirmed

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

37.9

Rank #191 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Sonnet 5.5 scores higher in 8 categories and Olmo 3.1 32b Think in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where Claude Sonnet 5.5 leads 87.9 to 36.3.
  • Olmo 3.1 32b Think has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Claude Sonnet 5.5Olmo 3.1 32b Think
ProviderAnthropicAllen Institute for AI (Ai2)
Noometry Index61.937.9
Released2026-09-28—
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1M—
Max output128K—
Input $ / M tokens$2—
Output $ / M tokens$10—
Results tracked3215

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

Category by category

Coding Claude Sonnet 5.5 leads

Claude Sonnet 5.5: 67.3 (#6), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 37.7 (#189)

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 5.5Olmo 3.1 32b Think
LMArena Coding15131291
FrontierCode52.1%—
CursorBench55.5%—
LMArena WebDev1774—
FrontierSWE61.9%—
SciCode61%—
ALE-Bench1,819—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Claude Sonnet 5.5: 45.0 (#16), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: —

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 5.5Olmo 3.1 32b Think
APEX-Agents75.5%—

Reasoning Claude Sonnet 5.5 leads

Claude Sonnet 5.5: 54.0 (#28), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 25.2 (#150)

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 5.5Olmo 3.1 32b Think
LMArena Hard Prompts14951272
NYT Connections (extended)80.5%—
CritPt31.4%—
Mystery Game Puzzles65%—
Epoch Capabilities Index165.03—

Math Claude Sonnet 5.5 leads

Claude Sonnet 5.5: 87.9 (#6), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 36.3 (#168)

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 5.5Olmo 3.1 32b Think
LMArena Math15101305
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)88.8%—
FrontierMath Tier 480.5%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025100%—
ProofBench100%—
FrontierMath Erdős2.9%—

Knowledge Claude Sonnet 5.5 leads

Claude Sonnet 5.5: 66.0 (#12), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 35.7 (#181)

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 5.5Olmo 3.1 32b Think
LMArena Expert15401295
GPQA Diamond95.6%—
SimpleQA Verified46.5%—

Multimodal Not comparable

Claude Sonnet 5.5: 51.5 (#6), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: —

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 5.5Olmo 3.1 32b Think
LMArena Vision1289—
Furniture Assembly75%—

Multilingual Claude Sonnet 5.5 leads

Claude Sonnet 5.5: 55.3 (#30), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 38.1 (#231)

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 5.5Olmo 3.1 32b Think
LMArena Non-English14521209
LMArena Chinese15221242
LMArena Russian14511193
LMArena French—1260
LMArena German—1262
LMArena Spanish—1289

Instruction Following Claude Sonnet 5.5 leads

Claude Sonnet 5.5: 78.3 (#11), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 65.6 (#218)

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 5.5Olmo 3.1 32b Think
LMArena Instruction Following14951247

Long Context Claude Sonnet 5.5 leads

Claude Sonnet 5.5: 45.9 (#28), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 38.6 (#195)

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 5.5Olmo 3.1 32b Think
LMArena Longer Query14981272

Writing & Preference Claude Sonnet 5.5 leads

Claude Sonnet 5.5: 66.0 (#40), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 46.2 (#220)

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 5.5Olmo 3.1 32b Think
LMArena Text14711272
LMArena Creative Writing14651226
LMArena Multi-Turn14741252

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Sonnet 5.5 better than Olmo 3.1 32b Think?

Claude Sonnet 5.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 61.9 to 37.9 on the Noometry Index.

Is Claude Sonnet 5.5 or Olmo 3.1 32b Think better for coding?

Claude Sonnet 5.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 67.3 versus 37.7 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Claude Sonnet 5.5 and Olmo 3.1 32b Think share?

12 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Sonnet 5.5 has 32 scored results on Noometry and Olmo 3.1 32b Think has 15.

Related comparisons

Go deeper