Noometry

Model comparison

Mistral Small vs Olmo 3.1 32b Think

Olmo 3.1 32b Think is the stronger model overall, scoring 37.9 to 33.4 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 15 shared benchmarks.

Mistral Small Mistral AI

33.4

Rank #243 Confirmed

Olmo 3.1 32b Think Allen Institute for AI (Ai2)

37.9

Rank #191 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 15 benchmarks with published results for both. Mistral Small scores higher in 4 categories and Olmo 3.1 32b Think in 4 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where Olmo 3.1 32b Think leads 36.3 to 16.4.

Side by side

Mistral SmallOlmo 3.1 32b Think
ProviderMistral AIAllen Institute for AI (Ai2)
Noometry Index33.437.9
Released2024-02-26—
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window262K—
Max output256K—
Input $ / M tokens$0.15—
Output $ / M tokens$0.60—
Results tracked3915

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

Category by category

Coding Olmo 3.1 32b Think leads

Mistral Small: 34.0 (#247), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 37.7 (#189)

BenchmarkMistral SmallOlmo 3.1 32b Think
LMArena Coding13621291
SciCode26.5%—
BigCodeBench Instruct36.1%—
LiveBench Coding36.2%—
BigCodeBench Complete46.6%—
ALE-Bench497.62—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Mistral Small: 28.1 (#93), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: —

BenchmarkMistral SmallOlmo 3.1 32b Think
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard37.1%—

Reasoning Olmo 3.1 32b Think leads

Mistral Small: 19.8 (#250), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 25.2 (#150)

BenchmarkMistral SmallOlmo 3.1 32b Think
LMArena Hard Prompts13351272
Kagi LLM Benchmark37.8%—
CritPt0%—
LiveBench Reasoning44.8%—
DTBench70.9%—
LiveBench Data Analysis53.7%—
LMCA20.6%—
LiveBench44%—

Math Olmo 3.1 32b Think leads

Mistral Small: 16.4 (#293), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 36.3 (#168)

BenchmarkMistral SmallOlmo 3.1 32b Think
LMArena Math13411305
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-20255.8%—
LiveBench Math39.9%—
MATH Level 546.8%—

Knowledge Olmo 3.1 32b Think leads

Mistral Small: 31.0 (#222), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 35.7 (#181)

BenchmarkMistral SmallOlmo 3.1 32b Think
LMArena Expert12911295
GPQA Diamond47.5%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate5.1%—
MMLU68.7%—

Multimodal Not comparable

Mistral Small: 33.5 (#96), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: —

BenchmarkMistral SmallOlmo 3.1 32b Think
LMArena Vision1142—

Multilingual Mistral Small leads

Mistral Small: 45.5 (#169), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 38.1 (#231)

BenchmarkMistral SmallOlmo 3.1 32b Think
LMArena Non-English13151209
LMArena Chinese13401242
LMArena French13371260
LMArena German13401262
LMArena Russian13241193
LMArena Spanish13461289
LMArena Japanese1275—
LMArena Korean1259—

Instruction Following Too close to call

Mistral Small: 66.4 (#209), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 65.6 (#218)

BenchmarkMistral SmallOlmo 3.1 32b Think
LMArena Instruction Following13101247
LiveBench Instruction Following63.7%—

Long Context Mistral Small leads

Mistral Small: 40.4 (#156), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 38.6 (#195)

BenchmarkMistral SmallOlmo 3.1 32b Think
LMArena Longer Query13271272

Writing & Preference Mistral Small leads

Mistral Small: 52.5 (#171), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 46.2 (#220)

BenchmarkMistral SmallOlmo 3.1 32b Think
LMArena Text13381272
LMArena Creative Writing13051226
LMArena Multi-Turn13441252
LiveBench Language30.5%—

Frequently asked questions

Is Mistral Small better than Olmo 3.1 32b Think?

Olmo 3.1 32b Think is the stronger model overall, scoring 37.9 to 33.4 on the Noometry Index.

Is Mistral Small or Olmo 3.1 32b Think better for coding?

Olmo 3.1 32b Think scores higher on coding benchmarks: 37.7 versus 34.0 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Mistral Small and Olmo 3.1 32b Think share?

15 benchmarks have published results for both models. Mistral Small has 39 scored results on Noometry and Olmo 3.1 32b Think has 15.

Related comparisons

Go deeper