Model comparison
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) vs Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct
Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.4 to 35.1 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 16 shared benchmarks.
Google
Allen Institute for AI (Ai2)Summary
- They share 16 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) scores higher in 3 categories and Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct in 5 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct leads 26.4 to 15.2.
- Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Allen Institute for AI (Ai2) | |
| Noometry Index | 35.1 | 39.4 |
| Released | 2024-12-06 | — |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | — | — |
| Max output | — | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Results tracked | 54 | 16 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 28.4 (#315), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 39.5 (#157)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1350 | 1347 |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 13.5% | — |
| Aider Polyglot | 38.2% | — |
| WeirdML | 25.8% | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 45.9% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 63.4% | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 59.9% | — |
| CadEval | 30% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 28.1 (#92), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| TheAgentCompany | 11.4% | — |
Reasoning Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 15.2 (#318), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 26.4 (#132)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1346 | 1322 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 1.3% | — |
| SimpleBench | 31.1% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 37.8% | — |
| EnigmaEval | 1.1% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 78.2% | — |
| DTBench | 63.2% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 69.4% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 135.36 | — |
| LiveBench | 66.9% | — |
Math Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 37.9 (#146), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 36.3 (#167)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1352 | 1305 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 57.8% | — |
| Omni-MATH | 45.9% | — |
| LiveBench Math | 75.8% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 82.2% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 1.7% | — |
Knowledge Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 32.0 (#213), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 36.1 (#175)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1339 | 1308 |
| GPQA Diamond | 64.1% | — |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 6.6% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | 73.7% | — |
| Confabulations | 12.4% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 55.6% | — |
| MMLU | 79.7% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 36.5 (#79), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1158 | — |
| GeoBench | 77% | — |
Multilingual Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 47.4 (#149), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 42.6 (#191)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1342 | 1275 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1373 | 1304 |
| LMArena French | 1391 | 1328 |
| LMArena German | 1353 | 1282 |
| LMArena Korean | 1313 | 1206 |
| LMArena Russian | 1351 | 1268 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1363 | 1336 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1294 | — |
Instruction Following Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 74.4 (#97), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 68.6 (#187)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1336 | 1299 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 85.8% | — |
| IFEval | 84.1% | — |
Long Context Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 38.1 (#203), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 39.9 (#166)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1344 | 1312 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | 61.1% | — |
Writing & Preference Too close to call
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 49.5 (#190), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 50.2 (#185)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1354 | 1311 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1340 | 1264 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1350 | 1309 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 73.8% | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1128 | — |
| WildBench | 80% | — |
| LiveBench Language | 51.3% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) better than Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct?
Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.4 to 35.1 on the Noometry Index.
Is Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) or Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct better for coding?
Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct scores higher on coding benchmarks: 39.5 versus 28.4 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) and Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct share?
16 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) has 54 scored results on Noometry and Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct has 16.