Model comparison
ERNIE 5.1 vs Olmo 3.1 32b Think
ERNIE 5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.8 to 37.9 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 15 shared benchmarks.
Baidu
Allen Institute for AI (Ai2)Summary
- They share 15 benchmarks with published results for both. ERNIE 5.1 scores higher in 7 categories and Olmo 3.1 32b Think in 1 category; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where ERNIE 5.1 leads 65.1 to 46.2.
- Olmo 3.1 32b Think has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| ERNIE 5.1 | Olmo 3.1 32b Think | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Baidu | Allen Institute for AI (Ai2) |
| Noometry Index | 43.8 | 37.9 |
| Released | — | — |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | — | — |
| Max output | — | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Results tracked | 19 | 15 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding ERNIE 5.1 leads
ERNIE 5.1: 44.0 (#76), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 37.7 (#189)
| Benchmark | ERNIE 5.1 | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1488 | 1291 |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
ERNIE 5.1: —, Olmo 3.1 32b Think: —
| Benchmark | ERNIE 5.1 | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Search | 1227 | — |
Reasoning Olmo 3.1 32b Think leads
ERNIE 5.1: 21.9 (#211), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 25.2 (#150)
| Benchmark | ERNIE 5.1 | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1481 | 1272 |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 23.4% | — |
Math ERNIE 5.1 leads
ERNIE 5.1: 40.3 (#92), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 36.3 (#168)
| Benchmark | ERNIE 5.1 | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1481 | 1305 |
Knowledge ERNIE 5.1 leads
ERNIE 5.1: 41.9 (#102), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 35.7 (#181)
| Benchmark | ERNIE 5.1 | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1492 | 1295 |
Multilingual ERNIE 5.1 leads
ERNIE 5.1: 55.5 (#29), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 38.1 (#231)
| Benchmark | ERNIE 5.1 | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1454 | 1209 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1508 | 1242 |
| LMArena French | 1488 | 1260 |
| LMArena German | 1470 | 1262 |
| LMArena Russian | 1459 | 1193 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1473 | 1289 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1422 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1427 | — |
Instruction Following ERNIE 5.1 leads
ERNIE 5.1: 76.7 (#37), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 65.6 (#218)
| Benchmark | ERNIE 5.1 | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1460 | 1247 |
Long Context ERNIE 5.1 leads
ERNIE 5.1: 44.7 (#59), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 38.6 (#195)
| Benchmark | ERNIE 5.1 | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1462 | 1272 |
Writing & Preference ERNIE 5.1 leads
ERNIE 5.1: 65.1 (#52), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 46.2 (#220)
| Benchmark | ERNIE 5.1 | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1468 | 1272 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1441 | 1226 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1471 | 1252 |
Frequently asked questions
Is ERNIE 5.1 better than Olmo 3.1 32b Think?
ERNIE 5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.8 to 37.9 on the Noometry Index.
Is ERNIE 5.1 or Olmo 3.1 32b Think better for coding?
ERNIE 5.1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 44.0 versus 37.7 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do ERNIE 5.1 and Olmo 3.1 32b Think share?
15 benchmarks have published results for both models. ERNIE 5.1 has 19 scored results on Noometry and Olmo 3.1 32b Think has 15.