Model comparison

Granite 3.1 8b Instruct vs Olmo 3 32b Think

Olmo 3 32b Think is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.7 to 32.4 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 12 shared benchmarks.

Granite 3.1 8b Instruct IBM

32.4

Rank #258 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. Granite 3.1 8b 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 35.5.

Side by side

Granite 3.1 8b Instruct and Olmo 3 32b Think specifications
Granite 3.1 8b InstructOlmo 3 32b Think
ProviderIBMAllen Institute for AI (Ai2)
Noometry Index32.438.7
Released——
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window——
Max output——
Input $ / M tokens——
Output $ / M tokens——
Results tracked1314

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

Category by category

Coding Olmo 3 32b Think leads

Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 34.5 (#233), Olmo 3 32b Think: 38.6 (#172)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.1 8b InstructOlmo 3 32b Think
LMArena Coding11861319

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 24.1 (#120), Olmo 3 32b Think: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.1 8b InstructOlmo 3 32b Think
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard27.1%—

Reasoning Olmo 3 32b Think leads

Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 22.1 (#207), Olmo 3 32b Think: 25.9 (#140)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.1 8b InstructOlmo 3 32b Think
LMArena Hard Prompts11451302

Math Olmo 3 32b Think leads

Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 33.0 (#209), Olmo 3 32b Think: 36.5 (#165)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.1 8b InstructOlmo 3 32b Think
LMArena Math11521316

Knowledge Olmo 3 32b Think leads

Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 31.1 (#220), Olmo 3 32b Think: 35.0 (#190)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.1 8b InstructOlmo 3 32b Think
LMArena Expert11421273

Multilingual Olmo 3 32b Think leads

Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 30.9 (#260), Olmo 3 32b Think: 41.2 (#210)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.1 8b InstructOlmo 3 32b Think
LMArena Non-English10991255
LMArena Chinese11451300
LMArena Russian10921254
LMArena French—1291
LMArena German—1290

Instruction Following Olmo 3 32b Think leads

Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 58.6 (#259), Olmo 3 32b Think: 67.2 (#198)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.1 8b InstructOlmo 3 32b Think
LMArena Instruction Following11311275

Long Context Olmo 3 32b Think leads

Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 35.2 (#241), Olmo 3 32b Think: 39.4 (#182)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.1 8b InstructOlmo 3 32b Think
LMArena Longer Query11621296

Writing & Preference Olmo 3 32b Think leads

Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 35.5 (#266), Olmo 3 32b Think: 49.1 (#193)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.1 8b InstructOlmo 3 32b Think
LMArena Text11501300
LMArena Creative Writing11291256
LMArena Multi-Turn11081290

Frequently asked questions

Is Granite 3.1 8b Instruct better than Olmo 3 32b Think?

Olmo 3 32b Think is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.7 to 32.4 on the Noometry Index.

Is Granite 3.1 8b Instruct or Olmo 3 32b Think better for coding?

Olmo 3 32b Think scores higher on coding benchmarks: 38.6 versus 34.5 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Granite 3.1 8b Instruct and Olmo 3 32b Think share?

12 benchmarks have published results for both models. Granite 3.1 8b Instruct has 13 scored results on Noometry and Olmo 3 32b Think has 14.

Related comparisons

Go deeper