Model comparison
Granite 4.2 30b vs Olmo 3 32b Think
Granite 4.2 30b is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.8 to 38.7 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 11 shared benchmarks.
Allen Institute for AI (Ai2)Summary
- They share 11 benchmarks with published results for both. Granite 4.2 30b scores higher in 7 categories and Olmo 3 32b Think in 0 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in multilingual, where Granite 4.2 30b leads 47.3 to 41.2.
Side by side
| Granite 4.2 30b | Olmo 3 32b Think | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | IBM | Allen Institute for AI (Ai2) |
| Noometry Index | 41.8 | 38.7 |
| Released | — | — |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | — | — |
| Max output | — | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Results tracked | 11 | 14 |
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 3 32b Think: 38.6 (#172)
| Benchmark | Granite 4.2 30b | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1396 | 1319 |
Reasoning Granite 4.2 30b leads
Granite 4.2 30b: 27.8 (#112), Olmo 3 32b Think: 25.9 (#140)
| Benchmark | Granite 4.2 30b | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1374 | 1302 |
Math Not comparable
Granite 4.2 30b: —, Olmo 3 32b Think: 36.5 (#165)
| Benchmark | Granite 4.2 30b | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | — | 1316 |
Knowledge Granite 4.2 30b leads
Granite 4.2 30b: 39.1 (#138), Olmo 3 32b Think: 35.0 (#190)
| Benchmark | Granite 4.2 30b | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1406 | 1273 |
Multilingual Granite 4.2 30b leads
Granite 4.2 30b: 47.3 (#151), Olmo 3 32b Think: 41.2 (#210)
| Benchmark | Granite 4.2 30b | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1340 | 1255 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1414 | 1300 |
| LMArena Russian | 1343 | 1254 |
| LMArena French | — | 1291 |
| LMArena German | — | 1290 |
Instruction Following Granite 4.2 30b leads
Granite 4.2 30b: 71.2 (#155), Olmo 3 32b Think: 67.2 (#198)
| Benchmark | Granite 4.2 30b | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1347 | 1275 |
Long Context Granite 4.2 30b leads
Granite 4.2 30b: 41.4 (#140), Olmo 3 32b Think: 39.4 (#182)
| Benchmark | Granite 4.2 30b | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1359 | 1296 |
Writing & Preference Granite 4.2 30b leads
Granite 4.2 30b: 53.8 (#156), Olmo 3 32b Think: 49.1 (#193)
| Benchmark | Granite 4.2 30b | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1361 | 1300 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1288 | 1256 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1339 | 1290 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Granite 4.2 30b better than Olmo 3 32b Think?
Granite 4.2 30b is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.8 to 38.7 on the Noometry Index.
Is Granite 4.2 30b or Olmo 3 32b Think better for coding?
Granite 4.2 30b scores higher on coding benchmarks: 41.0 versus 38.6 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Granite 4.2 30b and Olmo 3 32b Think share?
11 benchmarks have published results for both models. Granite 4.2 30b has 11 scored results on Noometry and Olmo 3 32b Think has 14.