Model comparison
Mixtral 8x22B vs Olmo 3.1 32b Think
Olmo 3.1 32b Think is the stronger model overall, scoring 37.3 to 26.7 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. Mixtral 8x22B scores higher in 0 categories and Olmo 3.1 32b Think in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Olmo 3.1 32b Think leads 35.0 to 15.1.
Side by side
| Mixtral 8x22B | Olmo 3.1 32b Think | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Mistral AI | Allen Institute for AI (Ai2) |
| Noometry Index | 26.7 | 37.3 |
| Released | 2024-04-17 | — |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 64K | — |
| Max output | 64K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $2 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $6 | — |
| Results tracked | 34 | 15 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Olmo 3.1 32b Think leads
Mixtral 8x22B: 23.8 (#324), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 37.1 (#186)
| Benchmark | Mixtral 8x22B | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1166 | 1292 |
| WeirdML | 3.2% | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 40.6% | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 50.2% | — |
| HumanEval+ | 72% | — |
| MBPP+ | 64.3% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Mixtral 8x22B: 22.8 (#119), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: —
| Benchmark | Mixtral 8x22B | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| Cybench | 7.5% | — |
Reasoning Olmo 3.1 32b Think leads
Mixtral 8x22B: 19.1 (#246), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 24.1 (#151)
| Benchmark | Mixtral 8x22B | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1150 | 1272 |
| DTBench | 55.1% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 122 | — |
| ForecastBench | 56.3 | — |
Math Olmo 3.1 32b Think leads
Mixtral 8x22B: 21.2 (#271), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 33.6 (#170)
| Benchmark | Mixtral 8x22B | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1184 | 1305 |
| Omni-MATH | 16.3% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 24.2% | — |
Knowledge Olmo 3.1 32b Think leads
Mixtral 8x22B: 15.1 (#288), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 35.0 (#178)
| Benchmark | Mixtral 8x22B | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1113 | 1294 |
| GPQA Diamond | 34.1% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | 46% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 33.4% | — |
| MMLU | 77.8% | — |
Multilingual Olmo 3.1 32b Think leads
Mixtral 8x22B: 32.9 (#250), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 38.3 (#226)
| Benchmark | Mixtral 8x22B | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1128 | 1210 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1116 | 1241 |
| LMArena French | 1165 | 1262 |
| LMArena German | 1141 | 1260 |
| LMArena Russian | 1158 | 1193 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1150 | 1288 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1037 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1056 | — |
Instruction Following Olmo 3.1 32b Think leads
Mixtral 8x22B: 57.9 (#261), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 65.8 (#213)
| Benchmark | Mixtral 8x22B | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1147 | 1246 |
| IFEval | 72.4% | — |
Long Context Olmo 3.1 32b Think leads
Mixtral 8x22B: 34.6 (#242), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 38.6 (#190)
| Benchmark | Mixtral 8x22B | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1144 | 1272 |
Writing & Preference Olmo 3.1 32b Think leads
Mixtral 8x22B: 37.1 (#257), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 46.4 (#215)
| Benchmark | Mixtral 8x22B | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1162 | 1271 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1141 | 1226 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1130 | 1252 |
| WildBench | 71.1% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Mixtral 8x22B better than Olmo 3.1 32b Think?
Olmo 3.1 32b Think is the stronger model overall, scoring 37.3 to 26.7 on the Noometry Index.
Is Mixtral 8x22B or Olmo 3.1 32b Think better for coding?
Olmo 3.1 32b Think scores higher on coding benchmarks: 37.1 versus 23.8 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Mixtral 8x22B and Olmo 3.1 32b Think share?
15 benchmarks have published results for both models. Mixtral 8x22B has 34 scored results on Noometry and Olmo 3.1 32b Think has 15.