Model comparison
Grok 4.1 vs Olmo 3 32b Think
Grok 4.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.5 to 38.7 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 14 shared benchmarks.
Allen Institute for AI (Ai2)Summary
- They share 14 benchmarks with published results for both. Grok 4.1 scores higher in 7 categories and Olmo 3 32b Think in 1 category; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Grok 4.1 leads 62.4 to 49.1.
- Olmo 3 32b Think has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Grok 4.1 | Olmo 3 32b Think | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | xAI | Allen Institute for AI (Ai2) |
| Noometry Index | 41.5 | 38.7 |
| Released | 2025-11-17 | — |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | — | — |
| Max output | — | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Results tracked | 19 | 14 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Olmo 3 32b Think leads
Grok 4.1: 33.7 (#253), Olmo 3 32b Think: 38.6 (#172)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1445 | 1319 |
| LMArena WebDev | 1214 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Grok 4.1: 34.1 (#49), Olmo 3 32b Think: —
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| Cybench | 39% | — |
Reasoning Grok 4.1 leads
Grok 4.1: 29.5 (#91), Olmo 3 32b Think: 25.9 (#140)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1435 | 1302 |
Math Grok 4.1 leads
Grok 4.1: 38.9 (#120), Olmo 3 32b Think: 36.5 (#165)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1422 | 1316 |
Knowledge Grok 4.1 leads
Grok 4.1: 39.5 (#133), Olmo 3 32b Think: 35.0 (#190)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1417 | 1273 |
Multilingual Grok 4.1 leads
Grok 4.1: 53.4 (#68), Olmo 3 32b Think: 41.2 (#210)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1425 | 1255 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1465 | 1300 |
| LMArena French | 1448 | 1291 |
| LMArena German | 1446 | 1290 |
| LMArena Russian | 1434 | 1254 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1397 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1407 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1438 | — |
Instruction Following Grok 4.1 leads
Grok 4.1: 73.8 (#111), Olmo 3 32b Think: 67.2 (#198)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1400 | 1275 |
Long Context Grok 4.1 leads
Grok 4.1: 43.2 (#100), Olmo 3 32b Think: 39.4 (#182)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1416 | 1296 |
Writing & Preference Grok 4.1 leads
Grok 4.1: 62.4 (#75), Olmo 3 32b Think: 49.1 (#193)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1437 | 1300 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1411 | 1256 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1437 | 1290 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Grok 4.1 better than Olmo 3 32b Think?
Grok 4.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.5 to 38.7 on the Noometry Index.
Is Grok 4.1 or Olmo 3 32b Think better for coding?
Olmo 3 32b Think scores higher on coding benchmarks: 38.6 versus 33.7 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Grok 4.1 and Olmo 3 32b Think share?
14 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok 4.1 has 19 scored results on Noometry and Olmo 3 32b Think has 14.