Model comparison
Llama 3.2 1B vs Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct
Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 32.2 to 19.9 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 11 shared benchmarks.
Meta
Allen Institute for AI (Ai2)Summary
- They share 11 benchmarks with published results for both. Llama 3.2 1B scores higher in 0 categories and Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct leads 42.3 to 21.4.
Side by side
| Llama 3.2 1B | Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Meta | Allen Institute for AI (Ai2) |
| Noometry Index | 19.9 | 32.2 |
| Released | 2024-09-24 | — |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 60K | — |
| Max output | 54K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.027 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.20 | — |
| Results tracked | 22 | 16 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct leads
Llama 3.2 1B: 20.6 (#333), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 34.6 (#222)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1071 | 1210 |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 8.2% | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 11.3% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Llama 3.2 1B: 14.5 (#142), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: —
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 10.8% | — |
| BALROG | 6.6% | — |
Reasoning Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct leads
Llama 3.2 1B: 15.6 (#304), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 22.6 (#174)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1044 | 1208 |
| Chess Puzzles | 0% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 101.95 | — |
Math Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct leads
Llama 3.2 1B: 9.7 (#308), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 24.8 (#255)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1086 | 1208 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 0.6% | — |
| Omni-MATH | — | 16.1% |
Knowledge Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct leads
Llama 3.2 1B: 7.2 (#307), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 19.2 (#274)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 23.9% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | — | 41.4% |
| GPQA (HELM) | — | 28.7% |
| LMArena Expert | 1007 | — |
Multilingual Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct leads
Llama 3.2 1B: 23.9 (#287), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 35.0 (#243)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 973 | 1160 |
| LMArena Chinese | 958 | 1192 |
| LMArena Russian | 941 | 1187 |
| LMArena German | 1014 | — |
Instruction Following Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct leads
Llama 3.2 1B: 52.6 (#285), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 61.8 (#238)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1031 | 1186 |
| IFEval | — | 78% |
Long Context Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct leads
Llama 3.2 1B: 31.9 (#269), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 36.2 (#229)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1050 | 1194 |
Writing & Preference Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct leads
Llama 3.2 1B: 21.4 (#305), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 42.3 (#231)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1055 | 1218 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1033 | 1199 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1030 | 1221 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 200 | — |
| WildBench | — | 73.4% |
Frequently asked questions
Is Llama 3.2 1B better than Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct?
Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 32.2 to 19.9 on the Noometry Index.
Is Llama 3.2 1B or Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct better for coding?
Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct scores higher on coding benchmarks: 34.6 versus 20.6 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Llama 3.2 1B and Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct share?
11 benchmarks have published results for both models. Llama 3.2 1B has 22 scored results on Noometry and Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct has 16.