Model comparison
Gemini 2.0 Pro vs Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct
Gemini 2.0 Pro and Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct score almost the same on the Noometry Index (39.1 vs 39.4), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.
Google
Allen Institute for AI (Ai2)Summary
- The widest gap is in long context, where Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct leads 39.9 to 29.2.
- Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Gemini 2.0 Pro | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Allen Institute for AI (Ai2) | |
| Noometry Index | 39.1 | 39.4 |
| Released | 2025-02-05 | — |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | — | — |
| Max output | — | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Results tracked | 14 | 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 Pro: 37.8 (#187), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 39.5 (#157)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Aider Polyglot | 35.6% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 63.5% | — |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1347 |
Reasoning Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct leads
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 22.3 (#198), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 26.4 (#132)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| EnigmaEval | 0.7% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 60.1% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1322 |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 68% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 135.06 | — |
| LiveBench | 65.1% | — |
Math Gemini 2.0 Pro leads
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 39.7 (#100), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 36.3 (#167)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Math | 71% | — |
| LMArena Math | — | 1305 |
| MATH Level 5 | 83.5% | — |
Knowledge Too close to call
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 36.5 (#167), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 36.1 (#175)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 65.7% | — |
| Confabulations | 18.4% | — |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1308 |
Multilingual Not comparable
Gemini 2.0 Pro: —, Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 42.6 (#191)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1275 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1304 |
| LMArena French | — | 1328 |
| LMArena German | — | 1282 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1206 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1268 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1336 |
Instruction Following Gemini 2.0 Pro leads
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 75.5 (#59), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 68.6 (#187)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 83.4% | — |
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1299 |
Long Context Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct leads
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 29.2 (#292), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 39.9 (#166)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | 41.7% | — |
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1312 |
Writing & Preference Gemini 2.0 Pro leads
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 52.7 (#165), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 50.2 (#185)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1311 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1264 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1309 |
| LiveBench Language | 44.9% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemini 2.0 Pro better than Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct?
Gemini 2.0 Pro and Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct score almost the same on the Noometry Index (39.1 vs 39.4), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Is Gemini 2.0 Pro or Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct better for coding?
Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct scores higher on coding benchmarks: 39.5 versus 37.8 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Gemini 2.0 Pro and Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 2.0 Pro has 14 scored results on Noometry and Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct has 16.