Model comparison

Llama 3.1-405B vs Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct

Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.4 to 30.7 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 16 shared benchmarks.

Llama 3.1-405B Meta

30.7

Rank #288 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 16 benchmarks with published results for both. Llama 3.1-405B scores higher in 0 categories and Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct leads 36.3 to 18.4.

Side by side

Llama 3.1-405B and Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct specifications
Llama 3.1-405BOlmo 3.1 32b Instruct
ProviderMetaAllen Institute for AI (Ai2)
Noometry Index30.739.4
Released2024-07-23—
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window——
Max output——
Input $ / M tokens——
Output $ / M tokens——
Results tracked4216

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

Category by category

Coding Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct leads

Llama 3.1-405B: 33.1 (#262), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 39.5 (#157)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3.1-405BOlmo 3.1 32b Instruct
LMArena Coding12911347
WeirdML21.4%—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Llama 3.1-405B: 21.0 (#140), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3.1-405BOlmo 3.1 32b Instruct
TheAgentCompany7.4%—
Cybench7.5%—

Reasoning Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct leads

Llama 3.1-405B: 16.8 (#300), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 26.4 (#132)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3.1-405BOlmo 3.1 32b Instruct
LMArena Hard Prompts12691322
SimpleBench23%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark45%—
DTBench61.4%—
BIG-Bench Hard82.9%—
Epoch Capabilities Index128.75—
ForecastBench59.9—
HellaSwag89.2%—
PIQA85.9%—
WinoGrande89.2%—

Math Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct leads

Llama 3.1-405B: 18.4 (#290), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 36.3 (#167)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3.1-405BOlmo 3.1 32b Instruct
LMArena Math12811305
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-20259.7%—
Omni-MATH24.9%—
MATH Level 549.8%—

Knowledge Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct leads

Llama 3.1-405B: 30.4 (#227), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 36.1 (#175)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3.1-405BOlmo 3.1 32b Instruct
LMArena Expert12431308
GPQA Diamond50.9%—
MMLU-Pro72.3%—
Confabulations17.6%—
GPQA (HELM)52.2%—
ARC (AI2) Challenge95.3%—
MMLU84.5%—
TriviaQA82.7%—

Multilingual Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct leads

Llama 3.1-405B: 40.7 (#214), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 42.6 (#191)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3.1-405BOlmo 3.1 32b Instruct
LMArena Non-English12481275
LMArena Chinese12421304
LMArena French12791328
LMArena German12521282
LMArena Korean11841206
LMArena Russian12651268
LMArena Spanish12601336
LMArena Japanese1208—

Instruction Following Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct leads

Llama 3.1-405B: 65.9 (#214), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 68.6 (#187)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3.1-405BOlmo 3.1 32b Instruct
LMArena Instruction Following12591299
IFEval81.1%—

Long Context Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct leads

Llama 3.1-405B: 38.4 (#197), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 39.9 (#166)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3.1-405BOlmo 3.1 32b Instruct
LMArena Longer Query12661312

Writing & Preference Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct leads

Llama 3.1-405B: 38.9 (#251), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 50.2 (#185)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3.1-405BOlmo 3.1 32b Instruct
LMArena Text12841311
LMArena Creative Writing12621264
LMArena Multi-Turn12971309
EQ-Bench Creative Writing870—
WildBench78.3%—

Frequently asked questions

Is Llama 3.1-405B better than Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct?

Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.4 to 30.7 on the Noometry Index.

Is Llama 3.1-405B or Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct better for coding?

Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct scores higher on coding benchmarks: 39.5 versus 33.1 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Llama 3.1-405B and Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct share?

16 benchmarks have published results for both models. Llama 3.1-405B has 42 scored results on Noometry and Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct has 16.

Related comparisons

Go deeper