Model comparison
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Olmo 3.1 32b Think
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.3 to 37.3 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 14 shared benchmarks.
DeepSeek
Allen Institute for AI (Ai2)Summary
- They share 14 benchmarks with published results for both. DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 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 reasoning, where DeepSeek V4.1 Flash leads 46.2 to 24.1.
Side by side
| DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | Olmo 3.1 32b Think | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | DeepSeek | Allen Institute for AI (Ai2) |
| Noometry Index | 50.3 | 37.3 |
| Released | 2026-09-09 | — |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 1M | — |
| Max output | 393K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.15 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.60 | — |
| Results tracked | 25 | 15 |
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: 52.8 (#29), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 37.1 (#186)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1511 | 1292 |
| LMArena WebDev | 1620 | — |
| SciCode | 51.9% | — |
| ALE-Bench | 1,092 | — |
Reasoning DeepSeek V4.1 Flash leads
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 46.2 (#39), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 24.1 (#151)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1485 | 1272 |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 89.6% | — |
| CritPt | 14.3% | — |
| DTBench | 89.9% | — |
| LMCA | 47% | — |
| Surface Evolver Bench | 46.3% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 155.01 | — |
Math DeepSeek V4.1 Flash leads
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 48.4 (#52), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 33.6 (#170)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1493 | 1305 |
| ProofBench | 54% | — |
Knowledge DeepSeek V4.1 Flash leads
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 41.6 (#97), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 35.0 (#178)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1505 | 1294 |
Multilingual DeepSeek V4.1 Flash leads
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 55.5 (#29), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 38.3 (#226)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1452 | 1210 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1506 | 1241 |
| LMArena French | 1448 | 1262 |
| LMArena Russian | 1473 | 1193 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1499 | 1288 |
| LMArena German | — | 1260 |
Instruction Following DeepSeek V4.1 Flash leads
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 77.6 (#24), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 65.8 (#213)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1475 | 1246 |
Long Context DeepSeek V4.1 Flash leads
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 45.2 (#46), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 38.6 (#190)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1476 | 1272 |
Writing & Preference DeepSeek V4.1 Flash leads
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 65.8 (#43), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 46.4 (#215)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1465 | 1271 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1436 | 1226 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1460 | 1252 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1540 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is DeepSeek V4.1 Flash better than Olmo 3.1 32b Think?
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.3 to 37.3 on the Noometry Index.
Is DeepSeek V4.1 Flash or Olmo 3.1 32b Think better for coding?
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash scores higher on coding benchmarks: 52.8 versus 37.1 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do DeepSeek V4.1 Flash and Olmo 3.1 32b Think share?
14 benchmarks have published results for both models. DeepSeek V4.1 Flash has 25 scored results on Noometry and Olmo 3.1 32b Think has 15.