Noometry

Model comparison

Grok 4.3 vs Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct

Grok 4.3 is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.8 to 39.4 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 16 shared benchmarks.

Grok 4.3 xAI

43.8

Rank #86 Confirmed

Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct Allen Institute for AI (Ai2)

39.4

Rank #168 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 16 benchmarks with published results for both. Grok 4.3 scores higher in 8 categories and Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where Grok 4.3 leads 52.5 to 36.1.
  • Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Grok 4.3Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct
ProviderxAIAllen Institute for AI (Ai2)
Noometry Index43.839.4
Released2026-04-17—
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1M—
Max output30K—
Input $ / M tokens$1.25—
Output $ / M tokens$2.50—
Results tracked4016

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding Grok 4.3 leads

Grok 4.3: 41.6 (#121), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 39.5 (#157)

BenchmarkGrok 4.3Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct
LMArena Coding14151347
LMArena WebDev1357—
SciCode47.3%—
WeirdML49.9%—
ALE-Bench944.17—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Grok 4.3: 27.7 (#99), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: —

BenchmarkGrok 4.3Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct
GDP.pdf8%—
LMArena Search1165—
Vending-Bench 235.26—

Reasoning Grok 4.3 leads

Grok 4.3: 35.9 (#68), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 26.4 (#132)

BenchmarkGrok 4.3Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct
LMArena Hard Prompts13961322
NYT Connections (extended)55.2%—
CritPt8%—
Chess Puzzles25%—
DTBench90.7%—
LMCA38.3%—
Epoch Capabilities Index149.16—
ForecastBench60.3—

Math Grok 4.3 leads

Grok 4.3: 46.0 (#74), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 36.3 (#167)

BenchmarkGrok 4.3Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct
LMArena Math13881305
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)42.8%—
FrontierMath Tier 414.6%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202593.3%—
ProofBench11%—

Knowledge Grok 4.3 leads

Grok 4.3: 52.5 (#62), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 36.1 (#175)

BenchmarkGrok 4.3Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct
LMArena Expert13851308
GPQA Diamond88.8%—
SimpleQA Verified33.2%—

Multimodal Not comparable

Grok 4.3: 31.6 (#104), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: —

BenchmarkGrok 4.3Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct
LMArena Vision1229—
Blueprint-Bench 20%—

Multilingual Grok 4.3 leads

Grok 4.3: 50.5 (#120), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 42.6 (#191)

BenchmarkGrok 4.3Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct
LMArena Non-English13851275
LMArena Chinese14221304
LMArena French14121328
LMArena German13951282
LMArena Korean13561206
LMArena Russian13991268
LMArena Spanish13981336
LMArena Japanese1379—

Instruction Following Grok 4.3 leads

Grok 4.3: 72.1 (#140), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 68.6 (#187)

BenchmarkGrok 4.3Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct
LMArena Instruction Following13661299

Long Context Grok 4.3 leads

Grok 4.3: 42.5 (#123), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 39.9 (#166)

BenchmarkGrok 4.3Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct
LMArena Longer Query13931312

Writing & Preference Grok 4.3 leads

Grok 4.3: 58.5 (#118), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 50.2 (#185)

BenchmarkGrok 4.3Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct
LMArena Text13971311
LMArena Creative Writing13801264
LMArena Multi-Turn14061309
EQ-Bench 41075—

Frequently asked questions

Is Grok 4.3 better than Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct?

Grok 4.3 is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.8 to 39.4 on the Noometry Index.

Is Grok 4.3 or Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct better for coding?

Grok 4.3 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 41.6 versus 39.5 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Grok 4.3 and Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct share?

16 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok 4.3 has 40 scored results on Noometry and Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct has 16.

Related comparisons

Go deeper