Noometry

Model comparison

Grok 4.6 vs Olmo 3.1 32b Think

Grok 4.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 56.8 to 37.3 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 15 shared benchmarks.

Grok 4.6 xAI

56.8

Rank #19 Confirmed

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

37.3

Rank #191 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 15 benchmarks with published results for both. Grok 4.6 scores higher in 8 categories and Olmo 3.1 32b Think in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where Grok 4.6 leads 61.3 to 24.1.
  • Olmo 3.1 32b Think has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Grok 4.6Olmo 3.1 32b Think
ProviderxAIAllen Institute for AI (Ai2)
Noometry Index56.837.3
Released2026-08-12—
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window500K—
Max output500K—
Input $ / M tokens$2—
Output $ / M tokens$6—
Results tracked4915

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

Category by category

Coding Grok 4.6 leads

Grok 4.6: 58.0 (#14), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 37.1 (#186)

BenchmarkGrok 4.6Olmo 3.1 32b Think
LMArena Coding14641292
DeepSWE67.5%—
FrontierCode48%—
CursorBench41.4%—
LMArena WebDev1620—
FrontierSWE25.3%—
SciCode56.5%—
WeirdML67.3%—
ALE-Bench1,508—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Grok 4.6: 39.4 (#25), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: —

BenchmarkGrok 4.6Olmo 3.1 32b Think
APEX-Agents65.3%—
GDP.pdf17.2%—
Vending-Bench 29,047—

Reasoning Grok 4.6 leads

Grok 4.6: 61.3 (#18), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 24.1 (#151)

BenchmarkGrok 4.6Olmo 3.1 32b Think
LMArena Hard Prompts14451272
ARC-AGI-267.1%—
SimpleBench75.9%—
NYT Connections (extended)80%—
ARC-AGI-187.5%—
CritPt19.7%—
Chess Puzzles40%—
EBR-Bench30.5%—
Mystery Game Puzzles34%—
DTBench97.3%—
LMCA48.5%—
Epoch Capabilities Index156.48—

Math Grok 4.6 leads

Grok 4.6: 66.8 (#19), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 33.6 (#170)

BenchmarkGrok 4.6Olmo 3.1 32b Think
LMArena Math14161305
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)66%—
FrontierMath Tier 431.7%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202599.2%—
ProofBench51%—

Knowledge Grok 4.6 leads

Grok 4.6: 63.3 (#18), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 35.0 (#178)

BenchmarkGrok 4.6Olmo 3.1 32b Think
LMArena Expert14631294
GPQA Diamond94%—
SimpleQA Verified49.3%—

Multimodal Not comparable

Grok 4.6: 43.9 (#18), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: —

BenchmarkGrok 4.6Olmo 3.1 32b Think
LMArena Vision1265—
Blueprint-Bench 233.2%—
Furniture Assembly40%—
LMArena Document1452—

Multilingual Grok 4.6 leads

Grok 4.6: 53.3 (#67), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 38.3 (#226)

BenchmarkGrok 4.6Olmo 3.1 32b Think
LMArena Non-English14221210
LMArena Chinese14791241
LMArena French14581262
LMArena German14251260
LMArena Russian14271193
LMArena Spanish14081288
LMArena Japanese1383—
LMArena Korean1395—

Instruction Following Grok 4.6 leads

Grok 4.6: 75.6 (#59), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 65.8 (#213)

BenchmarkGrok 4.6Olmo 3.1 32b Think
LMArena Instruction Following14311246

Long Context Grok 4.6 leads

Grok 4.6: 44.4 (#62), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 38.6 (#190)

BenchmarkGrok 4.6Olmo 3.1 32b Think
LMArena Longer Query14531272

Writing & Preference Grok 4.6 leads

Grok 4.6: 62.5 (#77), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 46.4 (#215)

BenchmarkGrok 4.6Olmo 3.1 32b Think
LMArena Text14271271
LMArena Creative Writing14301226
LMArena Multi-Turn14221252

Frequently asked questions

Is Grok 4.6 better than Olmo 3.1 32b Think?

Grok 4.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 56.8 to 37.3 on the Noometry Index.

Is Grok 4.6 or Olmo 3.1 32b Think better for coding?

Grok 4.6 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 58.0 versus 37.1 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Grok 4.6 and Olmo 3.1 32b Think share?

15 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok 4.6 has 49 scored results on Noometry and Olmo 3.1 32b Think has 15.

Related comparisons

Go deeper