Noometry

Model comparison

GPT-6 Luna vs Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct

GPT-6 Luna is the stronger model overall, scoring 53.3 to 39.4 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 16 shared benchmarks.

GPT-6 Luna OpenAI

53.3

Rank #36 Confirmed

Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct Allen Institute for AI (Ai2)

39.4

Rank #168 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 16 benchmarks with published results for both. GPT-6 Luna scores higher in 8 categories and Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where GPT-6 Luna leads 76.1 to 36.3.
  • Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

GPT-6 LunaOlmo 3.1 32b Instruct
ProviderOpenAIAllen Institute for AI (Ai2)
Noometry Index53.339.4
Released2026-09-22—
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1.05M—
Max output128K—
Input $ / M tokens$0.10—
Output $ / M tokens$0.50—
Results tracked4216

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

Category by category

Coding GPT-6 Luna leads

GPT-6 Luna: 55.5 (#25), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 39.5 (#157)

BenchmarkGPT-6 LunaOlmo 3.1 32b Instruct
LMArena Coding14391347
DeepSWE66.6%—
FrontierCode42.4%—
LMArena WebDev1581—
SciCode54.6%—
ALE-Bench1,577—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

GPT-6 Luna: 33.3 (#54), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: —

BenchmarkGPT-6 LunaOlmo 3.1 32b Instruct
APEX-Agents44.3%—
GDP.pdf23%—

Reasoning GPT-6 Luna leads

GPT-6 Luna: 48.2 (#41), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 26.4 (#132)

BenchmarkGPT-6 LunaOlmo 3.1 32b Instruct
LMArena Hard Prompts14111322
ARC-AGI-259.3%—
NYT Connections (extended)68.7%—
ARC-AGI-186.7%—
CritPt19.4%—
Chess Puzzles31%—
Mystery Game Puzzles7%—
DTBench90.1%—
LMCA44.5%—
Epoch Capabilities Index156.28—

Math GPT-6 Luna leads

GPT-6 Luna: 76.1 (#15), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 36.3 (#167)

BenchmarkGPT-6 LunaOlmo 3.1 32b Instruct
LMArena Math14161305
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)78.9%—
FrontierMath Tier 456.1%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202598.9%—
ProofBench64%—

Knowledge GPT-6 Luna leads

GPT-6 Luna: 57.0 (#41), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 36.1 (#175)

BenchmarkGPT-6 LunaOlmo 3.1 32b Instruct
LMArena Expert14441308
GPQA Diamond90.5%—
SimpleQA Verified41.4%—

Multimodal Not comparable

GPT-6 Luna: 42.4 (#30), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: —

BenchmarkGPT-6 LunaOlmo 3.1 32b Instruct
LMArena Vision1217—
Blueprint-Bench 231.2%—
Furniture Assembly44.2%—

Multilingual GPT-6 Luna leads

GPT-6 Luna: 50.5 (#117), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 42.6 (#191)

BenchmarkGPT-6 LunaOlmo 3.1 32b Instruct
LMArena Non-English13861275
LMArena Chinese14331304
LMArena French14201328
LMArena German13691282
LMArena Korean13601206
LMArena Russian13941268
LMArena Spanish13931336
LMArena Japanese1369—

Instruction Following GPT-6 Luna leads

GPT-6 Luna: 74.3 (#99), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 68.6 (#187)

BenchmarkGPT-6 LunaOlmo 3.1 32b Instruct
LMArena Instruction Following14091299

Long Context GPT-6 Luna leads

GPT-6 Luna: 43.0 (#111), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 39.9 (#166)

BenchmarkGPT-6 LunaOlmo 3.1 32b Instruct
LMArena Longer Query14091312

Writing & Preference GPT-6 Luna leads

GPT-6 Luna: 58.3 (#119), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 50.2 (#185)

BenchmarkGPT-6 LunaOlmo 3.1 32b Instruct
LMArena Text13911311
LMArena Creative Writing13631264
LMArena Multi-Turn13961309

Frequently asked questions

Is GPT-6 Luna better than Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct?

GPT-6 Luna is the stronger model overall, scoring 53.3 to 39.4 on the Noometry Index.

Is GPT-6 Luna or Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct better for coding?

GPT-6 Luna scores higher on coding benchmarks: 55.5 versus 39.5 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do GPT-6 Luna and Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct share?

16 benchmarks have published results for both models. GPT-6 Luna has 42 scored results on Noometry and Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct has 16.

Related comparisons

Go deeper