Model comparison
Granite 4.1 8b vs Olmo 3.1 32b Think
Granite 4.1 8b and Olmo 3.1 32b Think score almost the same on the Noometry Index (36.8 vs 37.3), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Last verified . 12 shared benchmarks.
Allen Institute for AI (Ai2)Summary
- They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. Granite 4.1 8b scores higher in 7 categories and Olmo 3.1 32b Think in 1 category; 4 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in coding, where Olmo 3.1 32b Think leads 37.1 to 29.9.
Side by side
| Granite 4.1 8b | Olmo 3.1 32b Think | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | IBM | Allen Institute for AI (Ai2) |
| Noometry Index | 36.8 | 37.3 |
| Released | — | — |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | — | — |
| Max output | — | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Results tracked | 13 | 15 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Olmo 3.1 32b Think leads
Granite 4.1 8b: 29.9 (#291), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 37.1 (#186)
| Benchmark | Granite 4.1 8b | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1313 | 1292 |
| LMArena WebDev | 1190 | — |
Reasoning Too close to call
Granite 4.1 8b: 24.6 (#142), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 24.1 (#151)
| Benchmark | Granite 4.1 8b | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1294 | 1272 |
Math Too close to call
Granite 4.1 8b: 33.8 (#167), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 33.6 (#170)
| Benchmark | Granite 4.1 8b | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1311 | 1305 |
Knowledge Too close to call
Granite 4.1 8b: 35.5 (#171), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 35.0 (#178)
| Benchmark | Granite 4.1 8b | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1310 | 1294 |
Multilingual Granite 4.1 8b leads
Granite 4.1 8b: 41.8 (#199), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 38.3 (#226)
| Benchmark | Granite 4.1 8b | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1261 | 1210 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1335 | 1241 |
| LMArena Russian | 1238 | 1193 |
| LMArena French | — | 1262 |
| LMArena German | — | 1260 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1288 |
Instruction Following Granite 4.1 8b leads
Granite 4.1 8b: 67.0 (#198), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 65.8 (#213)
| Benchmark | Granite 4.1 8b | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1268 | 1246 |
Long Context Too close to call
Granite 4.1 8b: 38.7 (#188), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 38.6 (#190)
| Benchmark | Granite 4.1 8b | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1275 | 1272 |
Writing & Preference Granite 4.1 8b leads
Granite 4.1 8b: 48.3 (#199), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 46.4 (#215)
| Benchmark | Granite 4.1 8b | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1291 | 1271 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1249 | 1226 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1269 | 1252 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Granite 4.1 8b better than Olmo 3.1 32b Think?
Granite 4.1 8b and Olmo 3.1 32b Think score almost the same on the Noometry Index (36.8 vs 37.3), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Is Granite 4.1 8b or Olmo 3.1 32b Think better for coding?
Olmo 3.1 32b Think scores higher on coding benchmarks: 37.1 versus 29.9 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Granite 4.1 8b and Olmo 3.1 32b Think share?
12 benchmarks have published results for both models. Granite 4.1 8b has 13 scored results on Noometry and Olmo 3.1 32b Think has 15.