Model comparison
Llama 3.2 1B vs Olmo 3 32b Think
Olmo 3 32b Think is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.7 to 20.1 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 13 shared benchmarks.
Meta
Allen Institute for AI (Ai2)Summary
- They share 13 benchmarks with published results for both. Llama 3.2 1B scores higher in 0 categories and Olmo 3 32b Think in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Olmo 3 32b Think leads 35.0 to 7.2.
Side by side
| Llama 3.2 1B | Olmo 3 32b Think | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Meta | Allen Institute for AI (Ai2) |
| Noometry Index | 20.1 | 38.7 |
| 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 | 14 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Olmo 3 32b Think leads
Llama 3.2 1B: 21.1 (#338), Olmo 3 32b Think: 38.6 (#172)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1070 | 1319 |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 8.2% | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 11.3% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Llama 3.2 1B: 14.6 (#150), Olmo 3 32b Think: —
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 10.8% | — |
| BALROG | 6.6% | — |
Reasoning Olmo 3 32b Think leads
Llama 3.2 1B: 16.2 (#308), Olmo 3 32b Think: 25.9 (#140)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1044 | 1302 |
| Chess Puzzles | 0% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 101.99 | — |
Math Olmo 3 32b Think leads
Llama 3.2 1B: 10.4 (#313), Olmo 3 32b Think: 36.5 (#165)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1086 | 1316 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 0.6% | — |
Knowledge Olmo 3 32b Think leads
Llama 3.2 1B: 7.2 (#312), Olmo 3 32b Think: 35.0 (#190)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1007 | 1273 |
| GPQA Diamond | 23.9% | — |
Multilingual Olmo 3 32b Think leads
Llama 3.2 1B: 23.8 (#292), Olmo 3 32b Think: 41.2 (#210)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 973 | 1255 |
| LMArena Chinese | 959 | 1300 |
| LMArena German | 1014 | 1290 |
| LMArena Russian | 941 | 1254 |
| LMArena French | — | 1291 |
Instruction Following Olmo 3 32b Think leads
Llama 3.2 1B: 52.4 (#290), Olmo 3 32b Think: 67.2 (#198)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1031 | 1275 |
Long Context Olmo 3 32b Think leads
Llama 3.2 1B: 31.9 (#274), Olmo 3 32b Think: 39.4 (#182)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1050 | 1296 |
Writing & Preference Olmo 3 32b Think leads
Llama 3.2 1B: 21.3 (#310), Olmo 3 32b Think: 49.1 (#193)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1055 | 1300 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1033 | 1256 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1030 | 1290 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 200 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Llama 3.2 1B better than Olmo 3 32b Think?
Olmo 3 32b Think is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.7 to 20.1 on the Noometry Index.
Is Llama 3.2 1B or Olmo 3 32b Think better for coding?
Olmo 3 32b Think scores higher on coding benchmarks: 38.6 versus 21.1 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Llama 3.2 1B and Olmo 3 32b Think share?
13 benchmarks have published results for both models. Llama 3.2 1B has 22 scored results on Noometry and Olmo 3 32b Think has 14.