Model comparison
Llama 3.2 90B vs Olmo 3.1 32b Think
Olmo 3.1 32b Think is the stronger model overall, scoring 37.9 to 27.5 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.
Meta
Allen Institute for AI (Ai2)Summary
- The widest gap is in math, where Olmo 3.1 32b Think leads 36.3 to 11.1.
Side by side
| Llama 3.2 90B | Olmo 3.1 32b Think | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Meta | Allen Institute for AI (Ai2) |
| Noometry Index | 27.5 | 37.9 |
| Released | 2024-09-24 | — |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | — | — |
| Max output | — | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Results tracked | 9 | 15 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Not comparable
Llama 3.2 90B: —, Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 37.7 (#189)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 90B | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | — | 1291 |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Llama 3.2 90B: 30.0 (#80), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: —
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 90B | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| BALROG | 27.3% | — |
Reasoning Olmo 3.1 32b Think leads
Llama 3.2 90B: 21.7 (#217), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 25.2 (#150)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 90B | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| EnigmaEval | 0.4% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1272 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 125.5 | — |
Math Olmo 3.1 32b Think leads
Llama 3.2 90B: 11.1 (#308), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 36.3 (#168)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 90B | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 2.6% | — |
| LMArena Math | — | 1305 |
| MATH Level 5 | 39.4% | — |
Knowledge Olmo 3.1 32b Think leads
Llama 3.2 90B: 21.7 (#274), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 35.7 (#181)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 90B | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 41% | — |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1295 |
| MMLU | 80.3% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Llama 3.2 90B: 25.4 (#124), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: —
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 90B | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1000 | — |
| GeoBench | 52% | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
Llama 3.2 90B: —, Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 38.1 (#231)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 90B | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1209 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1242 |
| LMArena French | — | 1260 |
| LMArena German | — | 1262 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1193 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1289 |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Llama 3.2 90B: —, Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 65.6 (#218)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 90B | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1247 |
Long Context Not comparable
Llama 3.2 90B: —, Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 38.6 (#195)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 90B | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1272 |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Llama 3.2 90B: —, Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 46.2 (#220)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 90B | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1272 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1226 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1252 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Llama 3.2 90B better than Olmo 3.1 32b Think?
Olmo 3.1 32b Think is the stronger model overall, scoring 37.9 to 27.5 on the Noometry Index.
How many benchmarks do Llama 3.2 90B and Olmo 3.1 32b Think share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Llama 3.2 90B has 9 scored results on Noometry and Olmo 3.1 32b Think has 15.