Model comparison

Gemma 2 2b IT vs Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct

Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.4 to 33.1 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 16 shared benchmarks.

Gemma 2 2b IT Google

33.1

Rank #248 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 16 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 2 2b IT scores higher in 0 categories and Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct leads 50.2 to 36.5.

Side by side

Gemma 2 2b IT and Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct specifications
Gemma 2 2b ITOlmo 3.1 32b Instruct
ProviderGoogleAllen Institute for AI (Ai2)
Noometry Index33.139.4
Released——
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window——
Max output——
Input $ / M tokens——
Output $ / M tokens——
Results tracked1716

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

Category by category

Coding Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct leads

Gemma 2 2b IT: 32.3 (#273), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 39.5 (#157)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 2 2b ITOlmo 3.1 32b Instruct
LMArena Coding11121347

Reasoning Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct leads

Gemma 2 2b IT: 21.4 (#224), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 26.4 (#132)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 2 2b ITOlmo 3.1 32b Instruct
LMArena Hard Prompts11131322

Math Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct leads

Gemma 2 2b IT: 32.6 (#212), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 36.3 (#167)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 2 2b ITOlmo 3.1 32b Instruct
LMArena Math11351305

Knowledge Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct leads

Gemma 2 2b IT: 29.9 (#231), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 36.1 (#175)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 2 2b ITOlmo 3.1 32b Instruct
LMArena Expert10961308

Multilingual Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct leads

Gemma 2 2b IT: 32.3 (#257), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 42.6 (#191)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 2 2b ITOlmo 3.1 32b Instruct
LMArena Non-English11211275
LMArena Chinese11321304
LMArena French11571328
LMArena German11141282
LMArena Korean10551206
LMArena Russian11181268
LMArena Spanish11401336
LMArena Japanese1083—

Instruction Following Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct leads

Gemma 2 2b IT: 57.8 (#263), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 68.6 (#187)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 2 2b ITOlmo 3.1 32b Instruct
LMArena Instruction Following11181299

Long Context Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct leads

Gemma 2 2b IT: 34.3 (#250), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 39.9 (#166)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 2 2b ITOlmo 3.1 32b Instruct
LMArena Longer Query11301312

Writing & Preference Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct leads

Gemma 2 2b IT: 36.5 (#263), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 50.2 (#185)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 2 2b ITOlmo 3.1 32b Instruct
LMArena Text11561311
LMArena Creative Writing11471264
LMArena Multi-Turn11181309

Frequently asked questions

Is Gemma 2 2b IT better than Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct?

Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.4 to 33.1 on the Noometry Index.

Is Gemma 2 2b IT or Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct better for coding?

Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct scores higher on coding benchmarks: 39.5 versus 32.3 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Gemma 2 2b IT and Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct share?

16 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 2 2b IT has 17 scored results on Noometry and Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct has 16.

Related comparisons

Go deeper