Model comparison
Muse Glimmer vs Olmo 3.1 32b Think
Muse Glimmer is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.3 to 37.3 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 12 shared benchmarks.
Meta
Allen Institute for AI (Ai2)Summary
- They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. Muse Glimmer scores higher in 8 categories and Olmo 3.1 32b Think in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in multilingual, where Muse Glimmer leads 50.6 to 38.3.
Side by side
| Muse Glimmer | Olmo 3.1 32b Think | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Meta | Allen Institute for AI (Ai2) |
| Noometry Index | 41.3 | 37.3 |
| Released | — | — |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | — | — |
| Max output | — | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Results tracked | 13 | 15 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Muse Glimmer leads
Muse Glimmer: 38.7 (#157), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 37.1 (#186)
| Benchmark | Muse Glimmer | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1417 | 1292 |
| LMArena WebDev | 1355 | — |
Reasoning Muse Glimmer leads
Muse Glimmer: 27.2 (#111), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 24.1 (#151)
| Benchmark | Muse Glimmer | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1395 | 1272 |
Math Muse Glimmer leads
Muse Glimmer: 36.1 (#128), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 33.6 (#170)
| Benchmark | Muse Glimmer | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1419 | 1305 |
Knowledge Muse Glimmer leads
Muse Glimmer: 37.9 (#140), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 35.0 (#178)
| Benchmark | Muse Glimmer | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1388 | 1294 |
Multilingual Muse Glimmer leads
Muse Glimmer: 50.6 (#117), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 38.3 (#226)
| Benchmark | Muse Glimmer | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1384 | 1210 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1412 | 1241 |
| LMArena Russian | 1393 | 1193 |
| LMArena French | — | 1262 |
| LMArena German | — | 1260 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1288 |
Instruction Following Muse Glimmer leads
Muse Glimmer: 72.7 (#134), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 65.8 (#213)
| Benchmark | Muse Glimmer | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1374 | 1246 |
Long Context Muse Glimmer leads
Muse Glimmer: 42.1 (#124), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 38.6 (#190)
| Benchmark | Muse Glimmer | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1381 | 1272 |
Writing & Preference Muse Glimmer leads
Muse Glimmer: 57.7 (#122), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 46.4 (#215)
| Benchmark | Muse Glimmer | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1389 | 1271 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1338 | 1226 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1398 | 1252 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Muse Glimmer better than Olmo 3.1 32b Think?
Muse Glimmer is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.3 to 37.3 on the Noometry Index.
Is Muse Glimmer or Olmo 3.1 32b Think better for coding?
Muse Glimmer scores higher on coding benchmarks: 38.7 versus 37.1 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Muse Glimmer and Olmo 3.1 32b Think share?
12 benchmarks have published results for both models. Muse Glimmer has 13 scored results on Noometry and Olmo 3.1 32b Think has 15.