Model comparison
Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo vs Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct
Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.4 to 38.8 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 16 shared benchmarks.
Allen Institute for AI (Ai2)Summary
- They share 16 benchmarks with published results for both. Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo scores higher in 7 categories and Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct in 1 category; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo leads 50.9 to 35.4.
Side by side
| Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Moonshot AI | Allen Institute for AI (Ai2) |
| Noometry Index | 45.4 | 38.8 |
| Released | 2025-11-06 | — |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | — | — |
| Max output | — | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Results tracked | 21 | 16 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Too close to call
Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo: 38.1 (#166), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 38.9 (#154)
| Benchmark | Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1454 | 1346 |
| LMArena WebDev | 1322 | — |
Reasoning Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo leads
Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo: 31.4 (#72), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 25.4 (#131)
| Benchmark | Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1428 | 1322 |
| Chess Puzzles | 20% | — |
Math Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo leads
Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo: 45.5 (#62), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 33.6 (#169)
| Benchmark | Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1429 | 1305 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 83.1% | — |
Knowledge Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo leads
Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo: 50.9 (#64), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 35.4 (#175)
| Benchmark | Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1439 | 1307 |
| GPQA Diamond | 84.2% | — |
Multilingual Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo leads
Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo: 51.6 (#104), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 42.8 (#185)
| Benchmark | Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1398 | 1275 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1457 | 1304 |
| LMArena French | 1425 | 1328 |
| LMArena German | 1390 | 1283 |
| LMArena Korean | 1329 | 1206 |
| LMArena Russian | 1390 | 1268 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1407 | 1337 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1356 | — |
Instruction Following Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo leads
Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo: 74.2 (#103), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 68.8 (#182)
| Benchmark | Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1403 | 1298 |
Long Context Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo leads
Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo: 43.2 (#99), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 39.9 (#161)
| Benchmark | Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1415 | 1312 |
Writing & Preference Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo leads
Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo: 60.2 (#99), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 50.4 (#179)
| Benchmark | Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1415 | 1311 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1373 | 1264 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1414 | 1309 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo better than Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct?
Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.4 to 38.8 on the Noometry Index.
Is Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo or Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct better for coding?
They score almost the same on coding (38.1 vs 38.9); test both on your own repository before choosing.
How many benchmarks do Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo and Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct share?
16 benchmarks have published results for both models. Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo has 21 scored results on Noometry and Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct has 16.