Noometry

Model comparison

Claude Sonnet 5 vs Olmo 3.1 32b Think

Claude Sonnet 5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 54.5 to 37.3 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 15 shared benchmarks.

Claude Sonnet 5 Anthropic

54.5

Rank #26 Confirmed

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

37.3

Rank #191 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 15 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Sonnet 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 leads 66.1 to 33.6.
  • Olmo 3.1 32b Think has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Claude Sonnet 5Olmo 3.1 32b Think
ProviderAnthropicAllen Institute for AI (Ai2)
Noometry Index54.537.3
Released2026-06-29—
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1M—
Max output128K—
Input $ / M tokens$2—
Output $ / M tokens$10—
Results tracked5115

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

Category by category

Coding Claude Sonnet 5 leads

Claude Sonnet 5: 55.5 (#20), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 37.1 (#186)

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 5Olmo 3.1 32b Think
LMArena Coding14831292
DeepSWE53.8%—
FrontierCode42.7%—
CursorBench34.1%—
LMArena WebDev1540—
SciCode53.6%—
GSO37.3%—
WeirdML68.8%—
ALE-Bench1,463—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Claude Sonnet 5: 42.7 (#16), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: —

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 5Olmo 3.1 32b Think
APEX-Agents54.5%—
GBAEval65.3%—
LMArena Search1194—
Vending-Bench 26,378—

Reasoning Claude Sonnet 5 leads

Claude Sonnet 5: 48.2 (#37), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 24.1 (#151)

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 5Olmo 3.1 32b Think
LMArena Hard Prompts14611272
SimpleBench60.6%—
NYT Connections (extended)75.1%—
CritPt16.9%—
Chess Puzzles35%—
Mystery Game Puzzles35%—
DTBench92.5%—
LMCA50%—
Surface Evolver Bench60%—
Bench to the Future 30.14—
Epoch Capabilities Index156.34—
ForecastBench61.1—

Math Claude Sonnet 5 leads

Claude Sonnet 5: 66.1 (#21), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 33.6 (#170)

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 5Olmo 3.1 32b Think
LMArena Math14671305
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)65.6%—
FrontierMath Tier 429.3%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202594.7%—
ProofBench77%—

Knowledge Claude Sonnet 5 leads

Claude Sonnet 5: 55.7 (#42), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 35.0 (#178)

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 5Olmo 3.1 32b Think
LMArena Expert14911294
GPQA Diamond90.5%—
SimpleQA Verified33.7%—

Multimodal Not comparable

Claude Sonnet 5: 42.4 (#26), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: —

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 5Olmo 3.1 32b Think
LMArena Vision1275—
Blueprint-Bench 224.9%—
LMArena Document1466—

Multilingual Claude Sonnet 5 leads

Claude Sonnet 5: 54.0 (#55), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 38.3 (#226)

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 5Olmo 3.1 32b Think
LMArena Non-English14311210
LMArena Chinese14751241
LMArena French14571262
LMArena German14481260
LMArena Russian14521193
LMArena Spanish14361288
LMArena Japanese1422—
LMArena Korean1411—

Instruction Following Claude Sonnet 5 leads

Claude Sonnet 5: 76.6 (#39), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 65.8 (#213)

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 5Olmo 3.1 32b Think
LMArena Instruction Following14531246

Long Context Claude Sonnet 5 leads

Claude Sonnet 5: 44.8 (#53), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 38.6 (#190)

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 5Olmo 3.1 32b Think
LMArena Longer Query14641272

Writing & Preference Claude Sonnet 5 leads

Claude Sonnet 5: 69.4 (#24), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 46.4 (#215)

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 5Olmo 3.1 32b Think
LMArena Text14431271
LMArena Creative Writing14161226
LMArena Multi-Turn14541252
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1794—
EQ-Bench 41236—

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Sonnet 5 better than Olmo 3.1 32b Think?

Claude Sonnet 5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 54.5 to 37.3 on the Noometry Index.

Is Claude Sonnet 5 or Olmo 3.1 32b Think better for coding?

Claude Sonnet 5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 55.5 versus 37.1 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Claude Sonnet 5 and Olmo 3.1 32b Think share?

15 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Sonnet 5 has 51 scored results on Noometry and Olmo 3.1 32b Think has 15.

Related comparisons

Go deeper