Model comparison
Llama 3.2 3B vs Olmo 3 32b Think
Olmo 3 32b Think is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.7 to 28.9 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 3B 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 writing & preference, where Olmo 3 32b Think leads 49.1 to 24.7.
Side by side
| Llama 3.2 3B | Olmo 3 32b Think | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Meta | Allen Institute for AI (Ai2) |
| Noometry Index | 28.9 | 38.7 |
| Released | 2024-09-24 | — |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 131K | — |
| Max output | 118K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.05 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.33 | — |
| Results tracked | 18 | 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 3B: 27.6 (#319), Olmo 3 32b Think: 38.6 (#172)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 3B | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1098 | 1319 |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 23.4% | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 28.3% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Llama 3.2 3B: 20.1 (#143), Olmo 3 32b Think: —
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 3B | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 21.9% | — |
| BALROG | 10.1% | — |
Reasoning Olmo 3 32b Think leads
Llama 3.2 3B: 21.0 (#228), Olmo 3 32b Think: 25.9 (#140)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 3B | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1095 | 1302 |
Math Olmo 3 32b Think leads
Llama 3.2 3B: 32.4 (#214), Olmo 3 32b Think: 36.5 (#165)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 3B | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1126 | 1316 |
Knowledge Olmo 3 32b Think leads
Llama 3.2 3B: 29.7 (#235), Olmo 3 32b Think: 35.0 (#190)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 3B | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1090 | 1273 |
Multilingual Olmo 3 32b Think leads
Llama 3.2 3B: 26.2 (#281), Olmo 3 32b Think: 41.2 (#210)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 3B | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1019 | 1255 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1017 | 1300 |
| LMArena German | 1056 | 1290 |
| LMArena Russian | 949 | 1254 |
| LMArena French | — | 1291 |
Instruction Following Olmo 3 32b Think leads
Llama 3.2 3B: 56.0 (#275), Olmo 3 32b Think: 67.2 (#198)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 3B | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1089 | 1275 |
Long Context Olmo 3 32b Think leads
Llama 3.2 3B: 33.4 (#261), Olmo 3 32b Think: 39.4 (#182)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 3B | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1100 | 1296 |
Writing & Preference Olmo 3 32b Think leads
Llama 3.2 3B: 24.7 (#307), Olmo 3 32b Think: 49.1 (#193)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 3B | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1110 | 1300 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1094 | 1256 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1105 | 1290 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 595 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Llama 3.2 3B better than Olmo 3 32b Think?
Olmo 3 32b Think is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.7 to 28.9 on the Noometry Index.
Is Llama 3.2 3B or Olmo 3 32b Think better for coding?
Olmo 3 32b Think scores higher on coding benchmarks: 38.6 versus 27.6 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Llama 3.2 3B and Olmo 3 32b Think share?
13 benchmarks have published results for both models. Llama 3.2 3B has 18 scored results on Noometry and Olmo 3 32b Think has 14.