Model comparison
Command A vs Olmo 3.1 32b Think
Olmo 3.1 32b Think is the stronger model overall, scoring 37.9 to 36.5 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 15 shared benchmarks.
Cohere
Allen Institute for AI (Ai2)Summary
- They share 15 benchmarks with published results for both. Command A scores higher in 5 categories and Olmo 3.1 32b Think in 3 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in coding, where Olmo 3.1 32b Think leads 37.7 to 27.2.
Side by side
| Command A | Olmo 3.1 32b Think | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Cohere | Allen Institute for AI (Ai2) |
| Noometry Index | 36.5 | 37.9 |
| Released | 2025-03-13 | — |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 256K | — |
| Max output | 8K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $2.50 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $10 | — |
| Results tracked | 24 | 15 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Olmo 3.1 32b Think leads
Command A: 27.2 (#322), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 37.7 (#189)
| Benchmark | Command A | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1330 | 1291 |
| Aider Polyglot | 12% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Command A: 35.9 (#40), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: —
| Benchmark | Command A | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 57.1% | — |
Reasoning Olmo 3.1 32b Think leads
Command A: 18.3 (#283), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 25.2 (#150)
| Benchmark | Command A | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1326 | 1272 |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 28.8% | — |
| DTBench | 61.3% | — |
| LMCA | 10.3% | — |
Math Too close to call
Command A: 36.2 (#171), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 36.3 (#168)
| Benchmark | Command A | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1300 | 1305 |
Knowledge Command A leads
Command A: 37.1 (#159), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 35.7 (#181)
| Benchmark | Command A | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1295 | 1295 |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 9.3% | — |
Multilingual Command A leads
Command A: 45.3 (#170), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 38.1 (#231)
| Benchmark | Command A | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1313 | 1209 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1327 | 1242 |
| LMArena French | 1351 | 1260 |
| LMArena German | 1341 | 1262 |
| LMArena Russian | 1314 | 1193 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1347 | 1289 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1285 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1285 | — |
Instruction Following Command A leads
Command A: 69.1 (#177), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 65.6 (#218)
| Benchmark | Command A | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1309 | 1247 |
Long Context Command A leads
Command A: 40.6 (#151), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 38.6 (#195)
| Benchmark | Command A | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1334 | 1272 |
Writing & Preference Command A leads
Command A: 47.6 (#208), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 46.2 (#220)
| Benchmark | Command A | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1331 | 1272 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1319 | 1226 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1339 | 1252 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1145 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Command A better than Olmo 3.1 32b Think?
Olmo 3.1 32b Think is the stronger model overall, scoring 37.9 to 36.5 on the Noometry Index.
Is Command A or Olmo 3.1 32b Think better for coding?
Olmo 3.1 32b Think scores higher on coding benchmarks: 37.7 versus 27.2 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Command A and Olmo 3.1 32b Think share?
15 benchmarks have published results for both models. Command A has 24 scored results on Noometry and Olmo 3.1 32b Think has 15.