Model comparison
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct vs Olmo 7b Instruct
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 33.2 to 30.3 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 10 shared benchmarks.
Allen Institute for AI (Ai2)Summary
- They share 10 benchmarks with published results for both. Granite 3.1 2b Instruct scores higher in 6 categories and Olmo 7b Instruct in 0 categories; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in instruction following, where Granite 3.1 2b Instruct leads 57.7 to 49.0.
Side by side
| Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | Olmo 7b Instruct | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | IBM | Allen Institute for AI (Ai2) |
| Noometry Index | 33.2 | 30.3 |
| Released | — | — |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | — | — |
| Max output | — | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Results tracked | 12 | 10 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Granite 3.1 2b Instruct leads
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 33.4 (#257), Olmo 7b Instruct: 29.6 (#303)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | Olmo 7b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1149 | 1016 |
Reasoning Granite 3.1 2b Instruct leads
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 22.0 (#209), Olmo 7b Instruct: 18.8 (#274)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | Olmo 7b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1138 | 993 |
Math Granite 3.1 2b Instruct leads
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 33.1 (#206), Olmo 7b Instruct: 30.2 (#237)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | Olmo 7b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1159 | 1018 |
Knowledge Not comparable
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 30.8 (#224), Olmo 7b Instruct: —
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | Olmo 7b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1131 | — |
Multilingual Granite 3.1 2b Instruct leads
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 29.1 (#269), Olmo 7b Instruct: 24.0 (#291)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | Olmo 7b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1068 | 977 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1139 | 1014 |
| LMArena Russian | 1063 | 947 |
Instruction Following Granite 3.1 2b Instruct leads
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 57.7 (#264), Olmo 7b Instruct: 49.0 (#301)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | Olmo 7b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1116 | 978 |
Long Context Not comparable
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 35.0 (#244), Olmo 7b Instruct: —
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | Olmo 7b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1155 | — |
Writing & Preference Granite 3.1 2b Instruct leads
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 34.1 (#274), Olmo 7b Instruct: 25.8 (#303)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | Olmo 7b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1127 | 1032 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1116 | 990 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1099 | 1007 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Granite 3.1 2b Instruct better than Olmo 7b Instruct?
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 33.2 to 30.3 on the Noometry Index.
Is Granite 3.1 2b Instruct or Olmo 7b Instruct better for coding?
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct scores higher on coding benchmarks: 33.4 versus 29.6 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Granite 3.1 2b Instruct and Olmo 7b Instruct share?
10 benchmarks have published results for both models. Granite 3.1 2b Instruct has 12 scored results on Noometry and Olmo 7b Instruct has 10.