Model comparison
Gemma 1.1 7b IT vs Olmo 3 32b Think
Olmo 3 32b Think is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.7 to 31.3 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 14 shared benchmarks.
Google
Allen Institute for AI (Ai2)Summary
- They share 14 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 1.1 7b IT scores higher in 0 categories and Olmo 3 32b Think in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Olmo 3 32b Think leads 49.1 to 30.4.
Side by side
| Gemma 1.1 7b IT | Olmo 3 32b Think | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Allen Institute for AI (Ai2) | |
| Noometry Index | 31.3 | 38.7 |
| Released | — | — |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | — | — |
| Max output | — | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Results tracked | 19 | 14 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Olmo 3 32b Think leads
Gemma 1.1 7b IT: 31.5 (#284), Olmo 3 32b Think: 38.6 (#172)
| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 7b IT | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1084 | 1319 |
| HumanEval+ | 35.4% | — |
| MBPP+ | 45% | — |
Reasoning Olmo 3 32b Think leads
Gemma 1.1 7b IT: 20.5 (#238), Olmo 3 32b Think: 25.9 (#140)
| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 7b IT | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1071 | 1302 |
Math Olmo 3 32b Think leads
Gemma 1.1 7b IT: 32.0 (#220), Olmo 3 32b Think: 36.5 (#165)
| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 7b IT | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1107 | 1316 |
Knowledge Olmo 3 32b Think leads
Gemma 1.1 7b IT: 28.3 (#247), Olmo 3 32b Think: 35.0 (#190)
| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 7b IT | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1039 | 1273 |
Multilingual Olmo 3 32b Think leads
Gemma 1.1 7b IT: 28.1 (#273), Olmo 3 32b Think: 41.2 (#210)
| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 7b IT | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1052 | 1255 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1061 | 1300 |
| LMArena French | 1065 | 1291 |
| LMArena German | 1054 | 1290 |
| LMArena Russian | 1046 | 1254 |
| LMArena Japanese | 971 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 988 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1049 | — |
Instruction Following Olmo 3 32b Think leads
Gemma 1.1 7b IT: 54.0 (#283), Olmo 3 32b Think: 67.2 (#198)
| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 7b IT | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1057 | 1275 |
Long Context Olmo 3 32b Think leads
Gemma 1.1 7b IT: 32.1 (#272), Olmo 3 32b Think: 39.4 (#182)
| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 7b IT | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1056 | 1296 |
Writing & Preference Olmo 3 32b Think leads
Gemma 1.1 7b IT: 30.4 (#288), Olmo 3 32b Think: 49.1 (#193)
| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 7b IT | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1094 | 1300 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1060 | 1256 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1040 | 1290 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemma 1.1 7b IT better than Olmo 3 32b Think?
Olmo 3 32b Think is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.7 to 31.3 on the Noometry Index.
Is Gemma 1.1 7b IT or Olmo 3 32b Think better for coding?
Olmo 3 32b Think scores higher on coding benchmarks: 38.6 versus 31.5 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Gemma 1.1 7b IT and Olmo 3 32b Think share?
14 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 1.1 7b IT has 19 scored results on Noometry and Olmo 3 32b Think has 14.