Model comparison
Llama 13b vs Olmo 3 32b Think
Olmo 3 32b Think is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.7 to 24.4 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 8 shared benchmarks.
Meta
Allen Institute for AI (Ai2)Summary
- They share 8 benchmarks with published results for both. Llama 13b scores higher in 0 categories and Olmo 3 32b Think in 6 categories; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Olmo 3 32b Think leads 49.1 to 13.8.
Side by side
| Llama 13b | Olmo 3 32b Think | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Meta | Allen Institute for AI (Ai2) |
| Noometry Index | 24.4 | 38.7 |
| Released | 2023-02-24 | — |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | — | — |
| Max output | — | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Results tracked | 21 | 14 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Olmo 3 32b Think leads
Llama 13b: 21.4 (#337), Olmo 3 32b Think: 38.6 (#172)
| Benchmark | Llama 13b | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 683 | 1319 |
Reasoning Olmo 3 32b Think leads
Llama 13b: 14.0 (#329), Olmo 3 32b Think: 25.9 (#140)
| Benchmark | Llama 13b | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 728 | 1302 |
| BIG-Bench Hard | 37.9% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 100.58 | — |
| HellaSwag | 79.2% | — |
| LAMBADA | 75.2% | — |
| PIQA | 80.1% | — |
| WinoGrande | 73% | — |
Math Olmo 3 32b Think leads
Llama 13b: 26.7 (#256), Olmo 3 32b Think: 36.5 (#165)
| Benchmark | Llama 13b | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 838 | 1316 |
| GSM8K | 20.6% | — |
Knowledge Not comparable
Llama 13b: —, Olmo 3 32b Think: 35.0 (#190)
| Benchmark | Llama 13b | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | — | 1273 |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | 52.7% | — |
| BoolQ | 78.7% | — |
| MMLU | 47.7% | — |
| OpenBookQA | 56.4% | — |
| TriviaQA | 77.9% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Llama 13b: —, Olmo 3 32b Think: —
| Benchmark | Llama 13b | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| ScienceQA | 43.3% | — |
Multilingual Olmo 3 32b Think leads
Llama 13b: 16.6 (#297), Olmo 3 32b Think: 41.2 (#210)
| Benchmark | Llama 13b | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 819 | 1255 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1300 |
| LMArena French | — | 1291 |
| LMArena German | — | 1290 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1254 |
Instruction Following Olmo 3 32b Think leads
Llama 13b: 36.7 (#305), Olmo 3 32b Think: 67.2 (#198)
| Benchmark | Llama 13b | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 781 | 1275 |
Long Context Not comparable
Llama 13b: —, Olmo 3 32b Think: 39.4 (#182)
| Benchmark | Llama 13b | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1296 |
Writing & Preference Olmo 3 32b Think leads
Llama 13b: 13.8 (#312), Olmo 3 32b Think: 49.1 (#193)
| Benchmark | Llama 13b | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 834 | 1300 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 794 | 1256 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 753 | 1290 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Llama 13b better than Olmo 3 32b Think?
Olmo 3 32b Think is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.7 to 24.4 on the Noometry Index.
Is Llama 13b or Olmo 3 32b Think better for coding?
Olmo 3 32b Think scores higher on coding benchmarks: 38.6 versus 21.4 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Llama 13b and Olmo 3 32b Think share?
8 benchmarks have published results for both models. Llama 13b has 21 scored results on Noometry and Olmo 3 32b Think has 14.