Model comparison
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct vs Olmo 3 32b Think
Olmo 3 32b Think is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.7 to 33.2 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 12 shared benchmarks.
Allen Institute for AI (Ai2)Summary
- They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. Granite 3.1 2b Instruct scores higher in 0 categories and Olmo 3 32b Think in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Olmo 3 32b Think leads 49.1 to 34.1.
Side by side
| Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | Olmo 3 32b Think | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | IBM | Allen Institute for AI (Ai2) |
| Noometry Index | 33.2 | 38.7 |
| Released | — | — |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | — | — |
| Max output | — | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Results tracked | 12 | 14 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Olmo 3 32b Think leads
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 33.4 (#257), Olmo 3 32b Think: 38.6 (#172)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1149 | 1319 |
Reasoning Olmo 3 32b Think leads
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 22.0 (#209), Olmo 3 32b Think: 25.9 (#140)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1138 | 1302 |
Math Olmo 3 32b Think leads
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 33.1 (#206), Olmo 3 32b Think: 36.5 (#165)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1159 | 1316 |
Knowledge Olmo 3 32b Think leads
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 30.8 (#224), Olmo 3 32b Think: 35.0 (#190)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1131 | 1273 |
Multilingual Olmo 3 32b Think leads
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 29.1 (#269), Olmo 3 32b Think: 41.2 (#210)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1068 | 1255 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1139 | 1300 |
| LMArena Russian | 1063 | 1254 |
| LMArena French | — | 1291 |
| LMArena German | — | 1290 |
Instruction Following Olmo 3 32b Think leads
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 57.7 (#264), Olmo 3 32b Think: 67.2 (#198)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1116 | 1275 |
Long Context Olmo 3 32b Think leads
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 35.0 (#244), Olmo 3 32b Think: 39.4 (#182)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1155 | 1296 |
Writing & Preference Olmo 3 32b Think leads
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 34.1 (#274), Olmo 3 32b Think: 49.1 (#193)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1127 | 1300 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1116 | 1256 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1099 | 1290 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Granite 3.1 2b Instruct better than Olmo 3 32b Think?
Olmo 3 32b Think is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.7 to 33.2 on the Noometry Index.
Is Granite 3.1 2b Instruct or Olmo 3 32b Think better for coding?
Olmo 3 32b Think scores higher on coding benchmarks: 38.6 versus 33.4 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Granite 3.1 2b Instruct and Olmo 3 32b Think share?
12 benchmarks have published results for both models. Granite 3.1 2b Instruct has 12 scored results on Noometry and Olmo 3 32b Think has 14.