Model comparison
Codestral vs Olmo 3 32b Think
Olmo 3 32b Think is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.7 to 30.6 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.
Mistral AI
Allen Institute for AI (Ai2)Summary
- The widest gap is in coding, where Olmo 3 32b Think leads 38.6 to 27.3.
- Olmo 3 32b Think has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Codestral | Olmo 3 32b Think | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Mistral AI | Allen Institute for AI (Ai2) |
| Noometry Index | 30.6 | 38.7 |
| Released | 2024-05-29 | — |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 256K | — |
| Max output | 8K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.30 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.90 | — |
| Results tracked | 7 | 14 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Olmo 3 32b Think leads
Codestral: 27.3 (#321), Olmo 3 32b Think: 38.6 (#172)
| Benchmark | Codestral | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| Aider Polyglot | 11.1% | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 41.8% | — |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1319 |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 52.5% | — |
| ALE-Bench | 137.78 | — |
| HumanEval+ | 73.8% | — |
| MBPP+ | 61.9% | — |
Reasoning Olmo 3 32b Think leads
Codestral: 19.8 (#251), Olmo 3 32b Think: 25.9 (#140)
| Benchmark | Codestral | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 32.5% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1302 |
Math Not comparable
Codestral: —, Olmo 3 32b Think: 36.5 (#165)
| Benchmark | Codestral | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | — | 1316 |
Knowledge Not comparable
Codestral: —, Olmo 3 32b Think: 35.0 (#190)
| Benchmark | Codestral | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | — | 1273 |
Multilingual Not comparable
Codestral: —, Olmo 3 32b Think: 41.2 (#210)
| Benchmark | Codestral | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1255 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1300 |
| LMArena French | — | 1291 |
| LMArena German | — | 1290 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1254 |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Codestral: —, Olmo 3 32b Think: 67.2 (#198)
| Benchmark | Codestral | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1275 |
Long Context Not comparable
Codestral: —, Olmo 3 32b Think: 39.4 (#182)
| Benchmark | Codestral | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1296 |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Codestral: —, Olmo 3 32b Think: 49.1 (#193)
| Benchmark | Codestral | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1300 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1256 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1290 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Codestral better than Olmo 3 32b Think?
Olmo 3 32b Think is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.7 to 30.6 on the Noometry Index.
Is Codestral or Olmo 3 32b Think better for coding?
Olmo 3 32b Think scores higher on coding benchmarks: 38.6 versus 27.3 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Codestral and Olmo 3 32b Think share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Codestral has 7 scored results on Noometry and Olmo 3 32b Think has 14.