Model comparison
GPT-5.1-Codex vs Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct
GPT-5.1-Codex and Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct score almost the same on the Noometry Index (38.6 vs 39.4), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.
Allen Institute for AI (Ai2)Summary
- The widest gap is in math, where Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct leads 36.3 to 30.3.
- Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| GPT-5.1-Codex | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenAI | Allen Institute for AI (Ai2) |
| Noometry Index | 38.6 | 39.4 |
| Released | 2025-11-12 | — |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 400K | — |
| Max output | 128K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $1.25 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $10 | — |
| Results tracked | 6 | 16 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding GPT-5.1-Codex leads
GPT-5.1-Codex: 41.9 (#116), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 39.5 (#157)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 66% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1337 | — |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1347 |
| ALE-Bench | 1,245 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
GPT-5.1-Codex: 38.0 (#33), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: —
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | 60.4% | — |
| METR Time Horizons | 70.8% | — |
Reasoning Not comparable
GPT-5.1-Codex: —, Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 26.4 (#132)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1322 |
Math Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct leads
GPT-5.1-Codex: 30.3 (#235), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 36.3 (#167)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| ProofBench | 9% | — |
| LMArena Math | — | 1305 |
Knowledge Not comparable
GPT-5.1-Codex: —, Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 36.1 (#175)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | — | 1308 |
Multilingual Not comparable
GPT-5.1-Codex: —, Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 42.6 (#191)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex | 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 Not comparable
GPT-5.1-Codex: —, Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 68.6 (#187)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1299 |
Long Context Not comparable
GPT-5.1-Codex: —, Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 39.9 (#166)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1312 |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
GPT-5.1-Codex: —, Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 50.2 (#185)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1311 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1264 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1309 |
Frequently asked questions
Is GPT-5.1-Codex better than Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct?
GPT-5.1-Codex and Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct score almost the same on the Noometry Index (38.6 vs 39.4), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Is GPT-5.1-Codex or Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct better for coding?
GPT-5.1-Codex scores higher on coding benchmarks: 41.9 versus 39.5 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do GPT-5.1-Codex and Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. GPT-5.1-Codex has 6 scored results on Noometry and Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct has 16.