Noometry

Model comparison

GPT-4 Turbo vs Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct

Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 32.7 to 30.5 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 11 shared benchmarks.

GPT-4 Turbo OpenAI

30.5

Rank #292 Confirmed

Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct Allen Institute for AI (Ai2)

32.7

Rank #254 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 11 benchmarks with published results for both. GPT-4 Turbo scores higher in 5 categories and Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct in 3 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct leads 26.8 to 9.0.
  • Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

GPT-4 TurboOlmo 2 0325 32b Instruct
ProviderOpenAIAllen Institute for AI (Ai2)
Noometry Index30.532.7
Released2023-11-06—
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window128K—
Max output4K—
Input $ / M tokens$10—
Output $ / M tokens$30—
Results tracked3616

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

Category by category

Coding Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct leads

GPT-4 Turbo: 33.8 (#249), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 35.2 (#227)

BenchmarkGPT-4 TurboOlmo 2 0325 32b Instruct
LMArena Coding12681210
WeirdML18%—
BigCodeBench Instruct48.2%—
BigCodeBench Complete58.2%—
HumanEval+86.6%—
MBPP+73.3%—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

GPT-4 Turbo: —, Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: —

BenchmarkGPT-4 TurboOlmo 2 0325 32b Instruct
METR Time Horizons36.7%—

Reasoning Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct leads

GPT-4 Turbo: 15.3 (#317), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 23.6 (#175)

BenchmarkGPT-4 TurboOlmo 2 0325 32b Instruct
LMArena Hard Prompts12511208
SimpleBench25.1%—
Chess Puzzles6%—
DTBench61.6%—
LMCA9.8%—
Epoch Capabilities Index127.25—
ForecastBench59.4—

Math Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct leads

GPT-4 Turbo: 9.0 (#322), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 26.8 (#255)

BenchmarkGPT-4 TurboOlmo 2 0325 32b Instruct
LMArena Math12721208
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)0.7%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-20256.7%—
Omni-MATH—16.1%
MATH Level 546.7%—

Knowledge GPT-4 Turbo leads

GPT-4 Turbo: 24.3 (#268), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 19.5 (#279)

BenchmarkGPT-4 TurboOlmo 2 0325 32b Instruct
GPQA Diamond46.6%—
MMLU-Pro—41.4%
Confabulations28.4%—
GPQA (HELM)—28.7%
LMArena Expert1223—
MMLU81.3%—

Multimodal Not comparable

GPT-4 Turbo: 30.6 (#110), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: —

BenchmarkGPT-4 TurboOlmo 2 0325 32b Instruct
LMArena Vision1090—

Multilingual GPT-4 Turbo leads

GPT-4 Turbo: 40.5 (#216), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 34.8 (#248)

BenchmarkGPT-4 TurboOlmo 2 0325 32b Instruct
LMArena Non-English12451160
LMArena Chinese12421192
LMArena Russian12591187
LMArena French1276—
LMArena German1259—
LMArena Japanese1194—
LMArena Korean1187—
LMArena Spanish1260—

Instruction Following GPT-4 Turbo leads

GPT-4 Turbo: 65.8 (#216), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 61.5 (#244)

BenchmarkGPT-4 TurboOlmo 2 0325 32b Instruct
LMArena Instruction Following12491186
IFEval—78%

Long Context GPT-4 Turbo leads

GPT-4 Turbo: 38.0 (#206), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 36.2 (#234)

BenchmarkGPT-4 TurboOlmo 2 0325 32b Instruct
LMArena Longer Query12541194

Writing & Preference GPT-4 Turbo leads

GPT-4 Turbo: 47.7 (#206), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 42.1 (#236)

BenchmarkGPT-4 TurboOlmo 2 0325 32b Instruct
LMArena Text12721218
LMArena Creative Writing12691199
LMArena Multi-Turn12671221
WildBench—73.4%

Frequently asked questions

Is GPT-4 Turbo better than Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct?

Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 32.7 to 30.5 on the Noometry Index.

Is GPT-4 Turbo or Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct better for coding?

Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct scores higher on coding benchmarks: 35.2 versus 33.8 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do GPT-4 Turbo and Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct share?

11 benchmarks have published results for both models. GPT-4 Turbo has 36 scored results on Noometry and Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct has 16.

Related comparisons

Go deeper