Model comparison
GPT-5 vs Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct
GPT-5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.9 to 32.2 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 16 shared benchmarks.
Allen Institute for AI (Ai2)Summary
- They share 16 benchmarks with published results for both. GPT-5 scores higher in 8 categories and Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where GPT-5 leads 56.5 to 19.2.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is GPQA (HELM): 79.2% for GPT-5 and 28.7% for Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct.
- Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| GPT-5 | Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenAI | Allen Institute for AI (Ai2) |
| Noometry Index | 50.9 | 32.2 |
| Released | 2025-08-07 | — |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 400K | — |
| Max output | 128K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $1.25 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $10 | — |
| Results tracked | 69 | 16 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding GPT-5 leads
GPT-5: 50.7 (#39), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 34.6 (#222)
| Benchmark | GPT-5 | Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1436 | 1210 |
| SWE-bench Verified | 73.6% | — |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 65% | — |
| Aider Polyglot | 88% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1417 | — |
| SciCode | 42.9% | — |
| GSO | 6.9% | — |
| WeirdML | 60.7% | — |
| ALE-Bench | 1,162 | — |
| AlgoTune | 1.67 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
GPT-5: 33.0 (#53), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: —
| Benchmark | GPT-5 | Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | 49.6% | — |
| GDPval | 34.8% | — |
| Remote Labor Index | 1.7% | — |
| DeepResearch Bench | 49.6% | — |
| BALROG | 32.8% | — |
| LMArena Search | 1133 | — |
| METR Time Horizons | 69.6% | — |
Reasoning GPT-5 leads
GPT-5: 38.3 (#55), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 22.6 (#174)
| Benchmark | GPT-5 | Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1415 | 1208 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 9.9% | — |
| SimpleBench | 56.7% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 72.7% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 65.7% | — |
| CritPt | 12.6% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 37% | — |
| EnigmaEval | 10.5% | — |
| EBR-Bench | 12.7% | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 23% | — |
| DTBench | 90.7% | — |
| LMCA | 40% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 150 | — |
| ForecastBench | 61.4 | — |
Math GPT-5 leads
GPT-5: 54.6 (#36), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 24.8 (#255)
| Benchmark | GPT-5 | Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Omni-MATH | 64.7% | 16.1% |
| LMArena Math | 1406 | 1208 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 55.4% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 22% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 91.4% | — |
| ProofBench | 18% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 98.1% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 32.4% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 12.5% | — |
Knowledge GPT-5 leads
GPT-5: 56.5 (#37), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 19.2 (#274)
| Benchmark | GPT-5 | Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| MMLU-Pro | 86.3% | 41.4% |
| GPQA (HELM) | 79.2% | 28.7% |
| GPQA Diamond | 86.2% | — |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 25.3% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | 50.1% | — |
| Confabulations | 10.3% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 14.7% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1420 | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
GPT-5: 46.1 (#12), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: —
| Benchmark | GPT-5 | Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1232 | — |
| GeoBench | 81% | — |
| VPCT | 66% | — |
Multilingual GPT-5 leads
GPT-5: 51.5 (#105), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 35.0 (#243)
| Benchmark | GPT-5 | Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1397 | 1160 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1423 | 1192 |
| LMArena Russian | 1406 | 1187 |
| LMArena French | 1409 | — |
| LMArena German | 1415 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1411 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1361 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1398 | — |
Instruction Following GPT-5 leads
GPT-5: 74.0 (#107), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 61.8 (#238)
| Benchmark | GPT-5 | Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| IFEval | 87.5% | 78% |
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1388 | 1186 |
Long Context GPT-5 leads
GPT-5: 69.5 (#2), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 36.2 (#229)
| Benchmark | GPT-5 | Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1399 | 1194 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | 97.2% | — |
Writing & Preference GPT-5 leads
GPT-5: 63.5 (#63), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 42.3 (#231)
| Benchmark | GPT-5 | Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1406 | 1218 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1365 | 1199 |
| WildBench | 85.7% | 73.4% |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1426 | 1221 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 86% | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1627 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is GPT-5 better than Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct?
GPT-5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.9 to 32.2 on the Noometry Index.
Is GPT-5 or Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct better for coding?
GPT-5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 50.7 versus 34.6 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do GPT-5 and Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct share?
16 benchmarks have published results for both models. GPT-5 has 69 scored results on Noometry and Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct has 16.