Model comparison
Grok 3 vs Olmo 3.1 32b Think
Grok 3 is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.9 to 37.9 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 15 shared benchmarks.
Allen Institute for AI (Ai2)Summary
- They share 15 benchmarks with published results for both. Grok 3 scores higher in 7 categories and Olmo 3.1 32b Think in 1 category; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in multilingual, where Grok 3 leads 52.3 to 38.1.
- Olmo 3.1 32b Think has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Grok 3 | Olmo 3.1 32b Think | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | xAI | Allen Institute for AI (Ai2) |
| Noometry Index | 39.9 | 37.9 |
| Released | 2025-04-09 | — |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | — | — |
| Max output | — | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Results tracked | 40 | 15 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Grok 3 leads
Grok 3: 41.9 (#115), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 37.7 (#189)
| Benchmark | Grok 3 | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1432 | 1291 |
| Aider Polyglot | 53.3% | — |
| WeirdML | 37.2% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Grok 3: 30.5 (#76), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: —
| Benchmark | Grok 3 | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| BALROG | 29.5% | — |
Reasoning Olmo 3.1 32b Think leads
Grok 3: 13.7 (#333), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 25.2 (#150)
| Benchmark | Grok 3 | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1434 | 1272 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 0% | — |
| SimpleBench | 36.1% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 61.3% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 5.5% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 138.33 | — |
Math Grok 3 leads
Grok 3: 38.0 (#145), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 36.3 (#168)
| Benchmark | Grok 3 | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1391 | 1305 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 55.6% | — |
| Omni-MATH | 46.4% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 88.7% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 3.8% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 0% | — |
Knowledge Grok 3 leads
Grok 3: 46.2 (#82), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 35.7 (#181)
| Benchmark | Grok 3 | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1421 | 1295 |
| GPQA Diamond | 75.8% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | 78.8% | — |
| Confabulations | 14.2% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 5.8% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 65% | — |
Multilingual Grok 3 leads
Grok 3: 52.3 (#87), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 38.1 (#231)
| Benchmark | Grok 3 | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1410 | 1209 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1448 | 1242 |
| LMArena French | 1460 | 1260 |
| LMArena German | 1431 | 1262 |
| LMArena Russian | 1416 | 1193 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1417 | 1289 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1387 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1373 | — |
Instruction Following Grok 3 leads
Grok 3: 75.0 (#73), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 65.6 (#218)
| Benchmark | Grok 3 | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1409 | 1247 |
| IFEval | 88.4% | — |
Long Context Too close to call
Grok 3: 38.7 (#192), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 38.6 (#195)
| Benchmark | Grok 3 | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1439 | 1272 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | 58.3% | — |
Writing & Preference Grok 3 leads
Grok 3: 55.8 (#141), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 46.2 (#220)
| Benchmark | Grok 3 | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1426 | 1272 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1414 | 1226 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1425 | 1252 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 76.4% | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1186 | — |
| WildBench | 84.9% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Grok 3 better than Olmo 3.1 32b Think?
Grok 3 is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.9 to 37.9 on the Noometry Index.
Is Grok 3 or Olmo 3.1 32b Think better for coding?
Grok 3 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 41.9 versus 37.7 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Grok 3 and Olmo 3.1 32b Think share?
15 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok 3 has 40 scored results on Noometry and Olmo 3.1 32b Think has 15.