Model comparison
Gemma 2 2b IT vs Olmo 3.1 32b Think
Olmo 3.1 32b Think is the stronger model overall, scoring 37.9 to 33.1 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 15 shared benchmarks.
Google
Allen Institute for AI (Ai2)Summary
- They share 15 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 2 2b IT scores higher in 0 categories and Olmo 3.1 32b Think in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Olmo 3.1 32b Think leads 46.2 to 36.5.
Side by side
| Gemma 2 2b IT | Olmo 3.1 32b Think | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Allen Institute for AI (Ai2) | |
| Noometry Index | 33.1 | 37.9 |
| Released | — | — |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | — | — |
| Max output | — | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Results tracked | 17 | 15 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Olmo 3.1 32b Think leads
Gemma 2 2b IT: 32.3 (#273), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 37.7 (#189)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 2b IT | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1112 | 1291 |
Reasoning Olmo 3.1 32b Think leads
Gemma 2 2b IT: 21.4 (#224), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 25.2 (#150)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 2b IT | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1113 | 1272 |
Math Olmo 3.1 32b Think leads
Gemma 2 2b IT: 32.6 (#212), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 36.3 (#168)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 2b IT | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1135 | 1305 |
Knowledge Olmo 3.1 32b Think leads
Gemma 2 2b IT: 29.9 (#231), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 35.7 (#181)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 2b IT | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1096 | 1295 |
Multilingual Olmo 3.1 32b Think leads
Gemma 2 2b IT: 32.3 (#257), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 38.1 (#231)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 2b IT | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1121 | 1209 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1132 | 1242 |
| LMArena French | 1157 | 1260 |
| LMArena German | 1114 | 1262 |
| LMArena Russian | 1118 | 1193 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1140 | 1289 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1083 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1055 | — |
Instruction Following Olmo 3.1 32b Think leads
Gemma 2 2b IT: 57.8 (#263), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 65.6 (#218)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 2b IT | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1118 | 1247 |
Long Context Olmo 3.1 32b Think leads
Gemma 2 2b IT: 34.3 (#250), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 38.6 (#195)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 2b IT | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1130 | 1272 |
Writing & Preference Olmo 3.1 32b Think leads
Gemma 2 2b IT: 36.5 (#263), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 46.2 (#220)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 2b IT | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1156 | 1272 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1147 | 1226 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1118 | 1252 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemma 2 2b IT better than Olmo 3.1 32b Think?
Olmo 3.1 32b Think is the stronger model overall, scoring 37.9 to 33.1 on the Noometry Index.
Is Gemma 2 2b IT or Olmo 3.1 32b Think better for coding?
Olmo 3.1 32b Think scores higher on coding benchmarks: 37.7 versus 32.3 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Gemma 2 2b IT and Olmo 3.1 32b Think share?
15 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 2 2b IT has 17 scored results on Noometry and Olmo 3.1 32b Think has 15.