Model comparison

Gemini 2.0 Pro vs Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct

Gemini 2.0 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.6 to 32.2 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.

Gemini 2.0 Pro Google

38.6

Rank #171 Confirmed

Summary

  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where Gemini 2.0 Pro leads 36.5 to 19.2.
  • Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Gemini 2.0 Pro and Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct specifications
Gemini 2.0 ProOlmo 2 0325 32b Instruct
ProviderGoogleAllen Institute for AI (Ai2)
Noometry Index38.632.2
Released2025-02-05—
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window——
Max output——
Input $ / M tokens——
Output $ / M tokens——
Results tracked1416

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

Category by category

Coding Gemini 2.0 Pro leads

Gemini 2.0 Pro: 37.4 (#182), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 34.6 (#222)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGemini 2.0 ProOlmo 2 0325 32b Instruct
Aider Polyglot35.6%—
LiveBench Coding63.5%—
LMArena Coding—1210

Reasoning Too close to call

Gemini 2.0 Pro: 21.6 (#194), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 22.6 (#174)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGemini 2.0 ProOlmo 2 0325 32b Instruct
EnigmaEval0.7%—
LiveBench Reasoning60.1%—
LMArena Hard Prompts—1208
LiveBench Data Analysis68%—
Epoch Capabilities Index135.06—
LiveBench65.1%—

Math Gemini 2.0 Pro leads

Gemini 2.0 Pro: 37.1 (#101), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 24.8 (#255)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGemini 2.0 ProOlmo 2 0325 32b Instruct
Omni-MATH—16.1%
LiveBench Math71%—
LMArena Math—1208
MATH Level 583.5%—

Knowledge Gemini 2.0 Pro leads

Gemini 2.0 Pro: 36.5 (#156), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 19.2 (#274)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGemini 2.0 ProOlmo 2 0325 32b Instruct
GPQA Diamond65.7%—
MMLU-Pro—41.4%
Confabulations18.4%—
GPQA (HELM)—28.7%

Multilingual Not comparable

Gemini 2.0 Pro: —, Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 35.0 (#243)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGemini 2.0 ProOlmo 2 0325 32b Instruct
LMArena Non-English—1160
LMArena Chinese—1192
LMArena Russian—1187

Instruction Following Gemini 2.0 Pro leads

Gemini 2.0 Pro: 75.6 (#57), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 61.8 (#238)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGemini 2.0 ProOlmo 2 0325 32b Instruct
LiveBench Instruction Following83.4%—
IFEval—78%
LMArena Instruction Following—1186

Long Context Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct leads

Gemini 2.0 Pro: 29.1 (#287), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 36.2 (#229)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGemini 2.0 ProOlmo 2 0325 32b Instruct
Fiction.LiveBench41.7%—
LMArena Longer Query—1194

Writing & Preference Gemini 2.0 Pro leads

Gemini 2.0 Pro: 52.7 (#164), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 42.3 (#231)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGemini 2.0 ProOlmo 2 0325 32b Instruct
LMArena Text—1218
LMArena Creative Writing—1199
WildBench—73.4%
LMArena Multi-Turn—1221
LiveBench Language44.9%—

Frequently asked questions

Is Gemini 2.0 Pro better than Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct?

Gemini 2.0 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.6 to 32.2 on the Noometry Index.

Is Gemini 2.0 Pro or Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct better for coding?

Gemini 2.0 Pro scores higher on coding benchmarks: 37.4 versus 34.6 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Gemini 2.0 Pro and Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 2.0 Pro has 14 scored results on Noometry and Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct has 16.

Related comparisons

Go deeper