Model comparison
Nova 2.0 Pro Preview vs Olmo 3.1 32b Think
Olmo 3.1 32b Think is the stronger model overall, scoring 37.3 to 32.8 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.
Allen Institute for AI (Ai2)Summary
- The widest gap is in coding, where Nova 2.0 Pro Preview leads 40.2 to 37.1.
- Olmo 3.1 32b Think has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Nova 2.0 Pro Preview | Olmo 3.1 32b Think | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Amazon | Allen Institute for AI (Ai2) |
| Noometry Index | 32.8 | 37.3 |
| Released | 2025-12-02 | — |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | — | — |
| Max output | — | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Results tracked | 3 | 15 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Nova 2.0 Pro Preview leads
Nova 2.0 Pro Preview: 40.2 (#130), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 37.1 (#186)
| Benchmark | Nova 2.0 Pro Preview | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | 42.7% | — |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1292 |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Nova 2.0 Pro Preview: 21.9 (#127), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: —
| Benchmark | Nova 2.0 Pro Preview | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| GDP.pdf | 2% | — |
Reasoning Olmo 3.1 32b Think leads
Nova 2.0 Pro Preview: 21.7 (#189), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 24.1 (#151)
| Benchmark | Nova 2.0 Pro Preview | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| CritPt | 0% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1272 |
Math Not comparable
Nova 2.0 Pro Preview: —, Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 33.6 (#170)
| Benchmark | Nova 2.0 Pro Preview | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | — | 1305 |
Knowledge Not comparable
Nova 2.0 Pro Preview: —, Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 35.0 (#178)
| Benchmark | Nova 2.0 Pro Preview | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | — | 1294 |
Multilingual Not comparable
Nova 2.0 Pro Preview: —, Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 38.3 (#226)
| Benchmark | Nova 2.0 Pro Preview | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1210 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1241 |
| LMArena French | — | 1262 |
| LMArena German | — | 1260 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1193 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1288 |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Nova 2.0 Pro Preview: —, Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 65.8 (#213)
| Benchmark | Nova 2.0 Pro Preview | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1246 |
Long Context Not comparable
Nova 2.0 Pro Preview: —, Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 38.6 (#190)
| Benchmark | Nova 2.0 Pro Preview | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1272 |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Nova 2.0 Pro Preview: —, Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 46.4 (#215)
| Benchmark | Nova 2.0 Pro Preview | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1271 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1226 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1252 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Nova 2.0 Pro Preview better than Olmo 3.1 32b Think?
Olmo 3.1 32b Think is the stronger model overall, scoring 37.3 to 32.8 on the Noometry Index.
Is Nova 2.0 Pro Preview or Olmo 3.1 32b Think better for coding?
Nova 2.0 Pro Preview scores higher on coding benchmarks: 40.2 versus 37.1 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Nova 2.0 Pro Preview and Olmo 3.1 32b Think share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Nova 2.0 Pro Preview has 3 scored results on Noometry and Olmo 3.1 32b Think has 15.