Noometry

Model comparison

Mixtral 8x22B vs Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct

Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.4 to 27.1 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 16 shared benchmarks.

Mixtral 8x22B Mistral AI

27.1

Rank #333 Confirmed

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

39.4

Rank #168 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 16 benchmarks with published results for both. Mixtral 8x22B 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 knowledge, where Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct leads 36.1 to 15.1.

Side by side

Mixtral 8x22BOlmo 3.1 32b Instruct
ProviderMistral AIAllen Institute for AI (Ai2)
Noometry Index27.139.4
Released2024-04-17—
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window64K—
Max output64K—
Input $ / M tokens$2—
Output $ / M tokens$6—
Results tracked3416

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

Category by category

Coding Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct leads

Mixtral 8x22B: 24.2 (#329), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 39.5 (#157)

BenchmarkMixtral 8x22BOlmo 3.1 32b Instruct
LMArena Coding11661347
WeirdML3.2%—
BigCodeBench Instruct40.6%—
BigCodeBench Complete50.2%—
HumanEval+72%—
MBPP+64.3%—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Mixtral 8x22B: 23.1 (#127), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: —

BenchmarkMixtral 8x22BOlmo 3.1 32b Instruct
Cybench7.5%—

Reasoning Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct leads

Mixtral 8x22B: 19.9 (#248), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 26.4 (#132)

BenchmarkMixtral 8x22BOlmo 3.1 32b Instruct
LMArena Hard Prompts11501322
DTBench55.1%—
Epoch Capabilities Index122.03—
ForecastBench56.3—

Math Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct leads

Mixtral 8x22B: 22.9 (#275), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 36.3 (#167)

BenchmarkMixtral 8x22BOlmo 3.1 32b Instruct
LMArena Math11841305
Omni-MATH16.3%—
MATH Level 524.2%—

Knowledge Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct leads

Mixtral 8x22B: 15.1 (#293), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 36.1 (#175)

BenchmarkMixtral 8x22BOlmo 3.1 32b Instruct
LMArena Expert11131308
GPQA Diamond34.1%—
MMLU-Pro46%—
GPQA (HELM)33.4%—
MMLU77.8%—

Multilingual Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct leads

Mixtral 8x22B: 32.8 (#255), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 42.6 (#191)

BenchmarkMixtral 8x22BOlmo 3.1 32b Instruct
LMArena Non-English11281275
LMArena Chinese11161304
LMArena French11661328
LMArena German11411282
LMArena Korean10571206
LMArena Russian11581268
LMArena Spanish11511336
LMArena Japanese1037—

Instruction Following Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct leads

Mixtral 8x22B: 57.7 (#266), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 68.6 (#187)

BenchmarkMixtral 8x22BOlmo 3.1 32b Instruct
LMArena Instruction Following11471299
IFEval72.4%—

Long Context Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct leads

Mixtral 8x22B: 34.7 (#247), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 39.9 (#166)

BenchmarkMixtral 8x22BOlmo 3.1 32b Instruct
LMArena Longer Query11441312

Writing & Preference Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct leads

Mixtral 8x22B: 36.9 (#262), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 50.2 (#185)

BenchmarkMixtral 8x22BOlmo 3.1 32b Instruct
LMArena Text11621311
LMArena Creative Writing11411264
LMArena Multi-Turn11301309
WildBench71.1%—

Frequently asked questions

Is Mixtral 8x22B better than Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct?

Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.4 to 27.1 on the Noometry Index.

Is Mixtral 8x22B or Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct better for coding?

Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct scores higher on coding benchmarks: 39.5 versus 24.2 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Mixtral 8x22B and Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct share?

16 benchmarks have published results for both models. Mixtral 8x22B has 34 scored results on Noometry and Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct has 16.

Related comparisons

Go deeper