Model comparison
Dolly 2.0-12b vs Olmo 3 32b Think
Olmo 3 32b Think is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.1 to 24.9 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 9 shared benchmarks.
Databricks
Allen Institute for AI (Ai2)Summary
- They share 9 benchmarks with published results for both. Dolly 2.0-12b scores higher in 0 categories and Olmo 3 32b Think in 6 categories; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Olmo 3 32b Think leads 49.2 to 15.3.
Side by side
| Dolly 2.0-12b | Olmo 3 32b Think | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Databricks | Allen Institute for AI (Ai2) |
| Noometry Index | 24.9 | 38.1 |
| Released | 2023-04-11 | — |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | — | — |
| Max output | — | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Results tracked | 17 | 14 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Olmo 3 32b Think leads
Dolly 2.0-12b: 23.0 (#327), Olmo 3 32b Think: 38.0 (#169)
| Benchmark | Dolly 2.0-12b | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 776 | 1318 |
Reasoning Olmo 3 32b Think leads
Dolly 2.0-12b: 14.6 (#315), Olmo 3 32b Think: 24.9 (#138)
| Benchmark | Dolly 2.0-12b | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 804 | 1302 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 88.94 | — |
| HellaSwag | 70.8% | — |
| PIQA | 75.4% | — |
| WinoGrande | 61.8% | — |
Math Olmo 3 32b Think leads
Dolly 2.0-12b: 25.0 (#250), Olmo 3 32b Think: 33.8 (#165)
| Benchmark | Dolly 2.0-12b | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 871 | 1315 |
Knowledge Not comparable
Dolly 2.0-12b: —, Olmo 3 32b Think: 34.4 (#189)
| Benchmark | Dolly 2.0-12b | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | — | 1272 |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | 39.6% | — |
| BoolQ | 56.3% | — |
| MMLU | 26.2% | — |
| OpenBookQA | 39.2% | — |
Multilingual Olmo 3 32b Think leads
Dolly 2.0-12b: 17.4 (#291), Olmo 3 32b Think: 41.4 (#205)
| Benchmark | Dolly 2.0-12b | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 836 | 1255 |
| LMArena Chinese | 836 | 1300 |
| LMArena French | — | 1291 |
| LMArena German | — | 1290 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1255 |
Instruction Following Olmo 3 32b Think leads
Dolly 2.0-12b: 38.9 (#299), Olmo 3 32b Think: 67.4 (#193)
| Benchmark | Dolly 2.0-12b | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 814 | 1275 |
Long Context Not comparable
Dolly 2.0-12b: —, Olmo 3 32b Think: 39.4 (#177)
| Benchmark | Dolly 2.0-12b | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1296 |
Writing & Preference Olmo 3 32b Think leads
Dolly 2.0-12b: 15.3 (#306), Olmo 3 32b Think: 49.2 (#188)
| Benchmark | Dolly 2.0-12b | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 851 | 1300 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 864 | 1256 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 740 | 1289 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Dolly 2.0-12b better than Olmo 3 32b Think?
Olmo 3 32b Think is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.1 to 24.9 on the Noometry Index.
Is Dolly 2.0-12b or Olmo 3 32b Think better for coding?
Olmo 3 32b Think scores higher on coding benchmarks: 38.0 versus 23.0 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Dolly 2.0-12b and Olmo 3 32b Think share?
9 benchmarks have published results for both models. Dolly 2.0-12b has 17 scored results on Noometry and Olmo 3 32b Think has 14.