Model comparison

gpt-oss-20b vs Olmo 3.1 32b Think

Olmo 3.1 32b Think is the stronger model overall, scoring 37.9 to 32.5 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 14 shared benchmarks.

gpt-oss-20b OpenAI

32.5

Rank #255 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 14 benchmarks with published results for both. gpt-oss-20b scores higher in 2 categories and Olmo 3.1 32b Think in 6 categories; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Olmo 3.1 32b Think leads 46.2 to 35.5.

Side by side

gpt-oss-20b and Olmo 3.1 32b Think specifications
gpt-oss-20bOlmo 3.1 32b Think
ProviderOpenAIAllen Institute for AI (Ai2)
Noometry Index32.537.9
Released2025-08-05—
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window131K—
Max output16K—
Input $ / M tokens$0.018—
Output $ / M tokens$0.09—
Results tracked3415

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

Category by category

Coding Too close to call

gpt-oss-20b: 37.6 (#192), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 37.7 (#189)

Coding benchmarks
Benchmarkgpt-oss-20bOlmo 3.1 32b Think
LMArena Coding13061291
SciCode34.4%—
WeirdML40.9%—
ALE-Bench566.05—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

gpt-oss-20b: 9.3 (#154), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
Benchmarkgpt-oss-20bOlmo 3.1 32b Think
Terminal-Bench3.4%—

Reasoning Olmo 3.1 32b Think leads

gpt-oss-20b: 19.3 (#261), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 25.2 (#150)

Reasoning benchmarks
Benchmarkgpt-oss-20bOlmo 3.1 32b Think
LMArena Hard Prompts12741272
Kagi LLM Benchmark53.2%—
CritPt1.4%—
Chess Puzzles4%—
DTBench68%—
LMCA14.5%—
Epoch Capabilities Index137.82—

Math gpt-oss-20b leads

gpt-oss-20b: 39.4 (#103), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 36.3 (#168)

Math benchmarks
Benchmarkgpt-oss-20bOlmo 3.1 32b Think
LMArena Math13171305
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202565.3%—
Omni-MATH56.5%—

Knowledge Olmo 3.1 32b Think leads

gpt-oss-20b: 34.6 (#195), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 35.7 (#181)

Knowledge benchmarks
Benchmarkgpt-oss-20bOlmo 3.1 32b Think
LMArena Expert12581295
GPQA Diamond60.8%—
MMLU-Pro74%—
GPQA (HELM)59.4%—

Multilingual gpt-oss-20b leads

gpt-oss-20b: 42.2 (#197), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 38.1 (#231)

Multilingual benchmarks
Benchmarkgpt-oss-20bOlmo 3.1 32b Think
LMArena Non-English12681209
LMArena Chinese13141242
LMArena German12551262
LMArena Russian12781193
LMArena Spanish12671289
LMArena French—1260
LMArena Japanese1244—
LMArena Korean1236—

Instruction Following Olmo 3.1 32b Think leads

gpt-oss-20b: 61.8 (#240), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 65.6 (#218)

Instruction Following benchmarks
Benchmarkgpt-oss-20bOlmo 3.1 32b Think
LMArena Instruction Following12361247
IFEval73.2%—

Long Context Too close to call

gpt-oss-20b: 37.9 (#209), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 38.6 (#195)

Long Context benchmarks
Benchmarkgpt-oss-20bOlmo 3.1 32b Think
LMArena Longer Query12501272

Writing & Preference Olmo 3.1 32b Think leads

gpt-oss-20b: 35.5 (#265), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 46.2 (#220)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
Benchmarkgpt-oss-20bOlmo 3.1 32b Think
LMArena Text12871272
LMArena Creative Writing12011226
LMArena Multi-Turn12681252
EQ-Bench Creative Writing666—
WildBench73.7%—

Frequently asked questions

Is gpt-oss-20b better than Olmo 3.1 32b Think?

Olmo 3.1 32b Think is the stronger model overall, scoring 37.9 to 32.5 on the Noometry Index.

Is gpt-oss-20b or Olmo 3.1 32b Think better for coding?

They score almost the same on coding (37.6 vs 37.7); test both on your own repository before choosing.

How many benchmarks do gpt-oss-20b and Olmo 3.1 32b Think share?

14 benchmarks have published results for both models. gpt-oss-20b has 34 scored results on Noometry and Olmo 3.1 32b Think has 15.

Related comparisons

Go deeper