Model comparison
Magistral Medium vs Olmo 3.1 32b Think
Olmo 3.1 32b Think is the stronger model overall, scoring 37.9 to 35.2 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 15 shared benchmarks.
Mistral AI
Allen Institute for AI (Ai2)Summary
- They share 15 benchmarks with published results for both. Magistral Medium scores higher in 5 categories and Olmo 3.1 32b Think in 3 categories; 5 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Olmo 3.1 32b Think leads 25.2 to 8.6.
Side by side
| Magistral Medium | Olmo 3.1 32b Think | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Mistral AI | Allen Institute for AI (Ai2) |
| Noometry Index | 35.2 | 37.9 |
| Released | 2025-03-17 | — |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 262K | — |
| Max output | 16K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $2 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $5 | — |
| Results tracked | 22 | 15 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Magistral Medium leads
Magistral Medium: 39.1 (#161), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 37.7 (#189)
| Benchmark | Magistral Medium | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1319 | 1291 |
| SciCode | 39.2% | — |
Reasoning Olmo 3.1 32b Think leads
Magistral Medium: 8.6 (#348), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 25.2 (#150)
| Benchmark | Magistral Medium | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1267 | 1272 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 0% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 16.2% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 6.1% | — |
| CritPt | 0.3% | — |
Math Olmo 3.1 32b Think leads
Magistral Medium: 35.1 (#189), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 36.3 (#168)
| Benchmark | Magistral Medium | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1250 | 1305 |
Knowledge Olmo 3.1 32b Think leads
Magistral Medium: 33.5 (#202), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 35.7 (#181)
| Benchmark | Magistral Medium | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1223 | 1295 |
Multilingual Magistral Medium leads
Magistral Medium: 39.6 (#224), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 38.1 (#231)
| Benchmark | Magistral Medium | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1232 | 1209 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1227 | 1242 |
| LMArena French | 1267 | 1260 |
| LMArena German | 1248 | 1262 |
| LMArena Russian | 1224 | 1193 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1271 | 1289 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1175 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1125 | — |
Instruction Following Too close to call
Magistral Medium: 66.0 (#211), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 65.6 (#218)
| Benchmark | Magistral Medium | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1254 | 1247 |
Long Context Too close to call
Magistral Medium: 39.3 (#183), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 38.6 (#195)
| Benchmark | Magistral Medium | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1295 | 1272 |
Writing & Preference Too close to call
Magistral Medium: 46.3 (#219), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 46.2 (#220)
| Benchmark | Magistral Medium | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1255 | 1272 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1245 | 1226 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1275 | 1252 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Magistral Medium better than Olmo 3.1 32b Think?
Olmo 3.1 32b Think is the stronger model overall, scoring 37.9 to 35.2 on the Noometry Index.
Is Magistral Medium or Olmo 3.1 32b Think better for coding?
Magistral Medium scores higher on coding benchmarks: 39.1 versus 37.7 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Magistral Medium and Olmo 3.1 32b Think share?
15 benchmarks have published results for both models. Magistral Medium has 22 scored results on Noometry and Olmo 3.1 32b Think has 15.