Model comparison

Llama 3-70B vs Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct

Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.8 to 28.5 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 16 shared benchmarks.

Llama 3-70B Meta

28.5

Rank #317 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 16 benchmarks with published results for both. Llama 3-70B 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 33.6 to 12.0.

Side by side

Llama 3-70B and Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct specifications
Llama 3-70BOlmo 3.1 32b Instruct
ProviderMetaAllen Institute for AI (Ai2)
Noometry Index28.538.8
Released2024-04-18—
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window——
Max output——
Input $ / M tokens——
Output $ / M tokens——
Results tracked3116

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

Category by category

Coding Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct leads

Llama 3-70B: 35.3 (#215), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 38.9 (#154)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3-70BOlmo 3.1 32b Instruct
LMArena Coding12061346
BigCodeBench Instruct43.6%—
BigCodeBench Complete54.5%—
HumanEval+72%—
MBPP+69%—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Llama 3-70B: 20.9 (#132), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3-70BOlmo 3.1 32b Instruct
Cybench5%—

Reasoning Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct leads

Llama 3-70B: 17.4 (#284), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 25.4 (#131)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3-70BOlmo 3.1 32b Instruct
LMArena Hard Prompts11951322
Kagi LLM Benchmark35.1%—
DTBench54.2%—
Epoch Capabilities Index122.91—
ForecastBench57.1—
WinoGrande83.5%—

Math Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct leads

Llama 3-70B: 12.0 (#299), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 33.6 (#169)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3-70BOlmo 3.1 32b Instruct
LMArena Math12181305
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-20254.3%—
MATH Level 522.6%—

Knowledge Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct leads

Llama 3-70B: 20.8 (#272), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 35.4 (#175)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3-70BOlmo 3.1 32b Instruct
LMArena Expert11491307
GPQA Diamond40.6%—
MMLU79.3%—

Multilingual Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct leads

Llama 3-70B: 33.8 (#246), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 42.8 (#185)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3-70BOlmo 3.1 32b Instruct
LMArena Non-English11421275
LMArena Chinese11141304
LMArena French12311328
LMArena German11691283
LMArena Korean10171206
LMArena Russian11591268
LMArena Spanish12411337
LMArena Japanese1017—

Instruction Following Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct leads

Llama 3-70B: 62.8 (#233), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 68.8 (#182)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3-70BOlmo 3.1 32b Instruct
LMArena Instruction Following11941298

Long Context Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct leads

Llama 3-70B: 35.6 (#235), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 39.9 (#161)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3-70BOlmo 3.1 32b Instruct
LMArena Longer Query11741312

Writing & Preference Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct leads

Llama 3-70B: 43.0 (#225), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 50.4 (#179)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3-70BOlmo 3.1 32b Instruct
LMArena Text12211311
LMArena Creative Writing12101264
LMArena Multi-Turn12231309

Frequently asked questions

Is Llama 3-70B better than Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct?

Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.8 to 28.5 on the Noometry Index.

Is Llama 3-70B or Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct better for coding?

Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct scores higher on coding benchmarks: 38.9 versus 35.3 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Llama 3-70B and Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct share?

16 benchmarks have published results for both models. Llama 3-70B has 31 scored results on Noometry and Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct has 16.

Related comparisons

Go deeper