Model comparison
GPT-5.2 Codex vs Olmo 3.1 32b Think
GPT-5.2 Codex is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.6 to 37.9 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.
Allen Institute for AI (Ai2)Summary
- The widest gap is in coding, where GPT-5.2 Codex leads 45.5 to 37.7.
- Olmo 3.1 32b Think has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| GPT-5.2 Codex | Olmo 3.1 32b Think | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenAI | Allen Institute for AI (Ai2) |
| Noometry Index | 42.6 | 37.9 |
| Released | 2025-12-18 | — |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 400K | — |
| Max output | 128K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $1.75 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $14 | — |
| Results tracked | 5 | 15 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding GPT-5.2 Codex leads
GPT-5.2 Codex: 45.5 (#71), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 37.7 (#189)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.2 Codex | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 72.8% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1339 | — |
| SWE-bench Multilingual | 66.3% | — |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1291 |
| ALE-Bench | 1,300 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
GPT-5.2 Codex: 41.0 (#22), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: —
| Benchmark | GPT-5.2 Codex | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | 66.5% | — |
Reasoning Not comparable
GPT-5.2 Codex: —, Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 25.2 (#150)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.2 Codex | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1272 |
Math Not comparable
GPT-5.2 Codex: —, Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 36.3 (#168)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.2 Codex | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | — | 1305 |
Knowledge Not comparable
GPT-5.2 Codex: —, Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 35.7 (#181)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.2 Codex | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | — | 1295 |
Multilingual Not comparable
GPT-5.2 Codex: —, Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 38.1 (#231)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.2 Codex | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1209 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1242 |
| LMArena French | — | 1260 |
| LMArena German | — | 1262 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1193 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1289 |
Instruction Following Not comparable
GPT-5.2 Codex: —, Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 65.6 (#218)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.2 Codex | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1247 |
Long Context Not comparable
GPT-5.2 Codex: —, Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 38.6 (#195)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.2 Codex | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1272 |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
GPT-5.2 Codex: —, Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 46.2 (#220)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.2 Codex | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1272 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1226 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1252 |
Frequently asked questions
Is GPT-5.2 Codex better than Olmo 3.1 32b Think?
GPT-5.2 Codex is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.6 to 37.9 on the Noometry Index.
Is GPT-5.2 Codex or Olmo 3.1 32b Think better for coding?
GPT-5.2 Codex scores higher on coding benchmarks: 45.5 versus 37.7 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do GPT-5.2 Codex and Olmo 3.1 32b Think share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. GPT-5.2 Codex has 5 scored results on Noometry and Olmo 3.1 32b Think has 15.