Model comparison
Mercury 2 vs Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct
Mercury 2 and Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct score almost the same on the Noometry Index (39.1 vs 39.4), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Last verified . 11 shared benchmarks.
Allen Institute for AI (Ai2)Summary
- They share 11 benchmarks with published results for both. Mercury 2 scores higher in 5 categories and Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct in 2 categories; 5 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in coding, where Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct leads 39.5 to 33.5.
- Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Mercury 2 | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Inception | Allen Institute for AI (Ai2) |
| Noometry Index | 39.1 | 39.4 |
| Released | 2026-02-20 | — |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 128K | — |
| Max output | 50K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.25 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.75 | — |
| Results tracked | 17 | 16 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct leads
Mercury 2: 33.5 (#255), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 39.5 (#157)
| Benchmark | Mercury 2 | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1391 | 1347 |
| LMArena WebDev | 1171 | — |
| SciCode | 38.7% | — |
| WeirdML | 43.2% | — |
| ALE-Bench | 785.58 | — |
Reasoning Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct leads
Mercury 2: 23.8 (#170), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 26.4 (#132)
| Benchmark | Mercury 2 | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1362 | 1322 |
| CritPt | 0.8% | — |
Math Not comparable
Mercury 2: —, Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 36.3 (#167)
| Benchmark | Mercury 2 | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | — | 1305 |
Knowledge Too close to call
Mercury 2: 36.2 (#172), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 36.1 (#175)
| Benchmark | Mercury 2 | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1358 | 1308 |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 12.3% | — |
Multilingual Mercury 2 leads
Mercury 2: 46.6 (#157), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 42.6 (#191)
| Benchmark | Mercury 2 | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1331 | 1275 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1417 | 1304 |
| LMArena Russian | 1304 | 1268 |
| LMArena French | — | 1328 |
| LMArena German | — | 1282 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1206 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1336 |
Instruction Following Mercury 2 leads
Mercury 2: 70.2 (#165), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 68.6 (#187)
| Benchmark | Mercury 2 | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1329 | 1299 |
Long Context Too close to call
Mercury 2: 40.5 (#154), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 39.9 (#166)
| Benchmark | Mercury 2 | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1330 | 1312 |
Writing & Preference Mercury 2 leads
Mercury 2: 53.8 (#155), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 50.2 (#185)
| Benchmark | Mercury 2 | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1355 | 1311 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1289 | 1264 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1358 | 1309 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Mercury 2 better than Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct?
Mercury 2 and Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct score almost the same on the Noometry Index (39.1 vs 39.4), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Is Mercury 2 or Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct better for coding?
Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct scores higher on coding benchmarks: 39.5 versus 33.5 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Mercury 2 and Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct share?
11 benchmarks have published results for both models. Mercury 2 has 17 scored results on Noometry and Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct has 16.