Noometry

Model comparison

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 52.8 to 39.4 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 16 shared benchmarks.

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash DeepSeek

52.8

Rank #38 Confirmed

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

39.4

Rank #168 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 16 benchmarks with published results for both. DeepSeek V4.1 Flash scores higher in 8 categories and Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where DeepSeek V4.1 Flash leads 66.7 to 36.3.

Side by side

DeepSeek V4.1 FlashOlmo 3.1 32b Instruct
ProviderDeepSeekAllen Institute for AI (Ai2)
Noometry Index52.839.4
Released2026-09-09—
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window1M—
Max output393K—
Input $ / M tokens$0.15—
Output $ / M tokens$0.60—
Results tracked3716

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

Category by category

Coding DeepSeek V4.1 Flash leads

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 52.9 (#32), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 39.5 (#157)

BenchmarkDeepSeek V4.1 FlashOlmo 3.1 32b Instruct
LMArena Coding15061347
LMArena WebDev1619—
SciCode51.9%—
ALE-Bench1,092—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 31.2 (#69), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: —

BenchmarkDeepSeek V4.1 FlashOlmo 3.1 32b Instruct
APEX-Agents39.5%—
GDP.pdf19.8%—

Reasoning DeepSeek V4.1 Flash leads

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 50.2 (#36), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 26.4 (#132)

BenchmarkDeepSeek V4.1 FlashOlmo 3.1 32b Instruct
LMArena Hard Prompts14831322
NYT Connections (extended)89.6%—
CritPt14.3%—
Mystery Game Puzzles43%—
DTBench89.9%—
LMCA47%—
Surface Evolver Bench46.3%—
Epoch Capabilities Index154.9—

Math DeepSeek V4.1 Flash leads

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 66.7 (#25), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 36.3 (#167)

BenchmarkDeepSeek V4.1 FlashOlmo 3.1 32b Instruct
LMArena Math14771305
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)67.4%—
FrontierMath Tier 426.8%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202598.3%—
ProofBench54%—

Knowledge DeepSeek V4.1 Flash leads

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 57.9 (#38), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 36.1 (#175)

BenchmarkDeepSeek V4.1 FlashOlmo 3.1 32b Instruct
LMArena Expert15061308
GPQA Diamond89.8%—

Multimodal Not comparable

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 39.1 (#61), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: —

BenchmarkDeepSeek V4.1 FlashOlmo 3.1 32b Instruct
LMArena Vision1277—
Furniture Assembly34.2%—

Multilingual DeepSeek V4.1 Flash leads

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 55.0 (#35), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 42.6 (#191)

BenchmarkDeepSeek V4.1 FlashOlmo 3.1 32b Instruct
LMArena Non-English14481275
LMArena Chinese14971304
LMArena French14521328
LMArena German14841282
LMArena Korean14521206
LMArena Russian14711268
LMArena Spanish14591336
LMArena Japanese1412—

Instruction Following DeepSeek V4.1 Flash leads

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 77.3 (#26), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 68.6 (#187)

BenchmarkDeepSeek V4.1 FlashOlmo 3.1 32b Instruct
LMArena Instruction Following14741299

Long Context DeepSeek V4.1 Flash leads

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 45.2 (#47), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 39.9 (#166)

BenchmarkDeepSeek V4.1 FlashOlmo 3.1 32b Instruct
LMArena Longer Query14751312

Writing & Preference DeepSeek V4.1 Flash leads

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 65.4 (#48), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 50.2 (#185)

BenchmarkDeepSeek V4.1 FlashOlmo 3.1 32b Instruct
LMArena Text14621311
LMArena Creative Writing14351264
LMArena Multi-Turn14571309
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1540—

Frequently asked questions

Is DeepSeek V4.1 Flash better than Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct?

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 52.8 to 39.4 on the Noometry Index.

Is DeepSeek V4.1 Flash or Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct better for coding?

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash scores higher on coding benchmarks: 52.9 versus 39.5 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do DeepSeek V4.1 Flash and Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct share?

16 benchmarks have published results for both models. DeepSeek V4.1 Flash has 37 scored results on Noometry and Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct has 16.

Related comparisons

Go deeper