Model comparison
Granite 4.2 30b vs Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct
Granite 4.2 30b is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.8 to 32.7 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 4.2 30b scores higher in 7 categories and Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct in 0 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Granite 4.2 30b leads 39.1 to 19.5.
Side by side
| Granite 4.2 30b | Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | IBM | Allen Institute for AI (Ai2) |
| Noometry Index | 41.8 | 32.7 |
| Released | — | — |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | — | — |
| Max output | — | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Results tracked | 11 | 16 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Granite 4.2 30b leads
Granite 4.2 30b: 41.0 (#126), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 35.2 (#227)
| Benchmark | Granite 4.2 30b | Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1396 | 1210 |
Reasoning Granite 4.2 30b leads
Granite 4.2 30b: 27.8 (#112), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 23.6 (#175)
| Benchmark | Granite 4.2 30b | Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1374 | 1208 |
Math Not comparable
Granite 4.2 30b: —, Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 26.8 (#255)
| Benchmark | Granite 4.2 30b | Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Omni-MATH | — | 16.1% |
| LMArena Math | — | 1208 |
Knowledge Granite 4.2 30b leads
Granite 4.2 30b: 39.1 (#138), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 19.5 (#279)
| Benchmark | Granite 4.2 30b | Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| MMLU-Pro | — | 41.4% |
| GPQA (HELM) | — | 28.7% |
| LMArena Expert | 1406 | — |
Multilingual Granite 4.2 30b leads
Granite 4.2 30b: 47.3 (#151), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 34.8 (#248)
| Benchmark | Granite 4.2 30b | Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1340 | 1160 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1414 | 1192 |
| LMArena Russian | 1343 | 1187 |
Instruction Following Granite 4.2 30b leads
Granite 4.2 30b: 71.2 (#155), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 61.5 (#244)
| Benchmark | Granite 4.2 30b | Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1347 | 1186 |
| IFEval | — | 78% |
Long Context Granite 4.2 30b leads
Granite 4.2 30b: 41.4 (#140), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 36.2 (#234)
| Benchmark | Granite 4.2 30b | Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1359 | 1194 |
Writing & Preference Granite 4.2 30b leads
Granite 4.2 30b: 53.8 (#156), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 42.1 (#236)
| Benchmark | Granite 4.2 30b | Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1361 | 1218 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1288 | 1199 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1339 | 1221 |
| WildBench | — | 73.4% |
Frequently asked questions
Is Granite 4.2 30b better than Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct?
Granite 4.2 30b is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.8 to 32.7 on the Noometry Index.
Is Granite 4.2 30b or Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct better for coding?
Granite 4.2 30b scores higher on coding benchmarks: 41.0 versus 35.2 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Granite 4.2 30b and Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct share?
10 benchmarks have published results for both models. Granite 4.2 30b has 11 scored results on Noometry and Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct has 16.