Model comparison
o1 vs Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct
o1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.9 to 39.4 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 16 shared benchmarks.
Allen Institute for AI (Ai2)Summary
- They share 16 benchmarks with published results for both. o1 scores higher in 7 categories and Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct in 1 category; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in long context, where o1 leads 50.3 to 39.9.
- Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| o1 | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenAI | Allen Institute for AI (Ai2) |
| Noometry Index | 40.9 | 39.4 |
| Released | 2024-09-12 | — |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 200K | — |
| Max output | 100K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $15 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $60 | — |
| Results tracked | 52 | 16 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding o1 leads
o1: 46.1 (#70), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 39.5 (#157)
| Benchmark | o1 | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1367 | 1347 |
| Aider Polyglot | 61.7% | — |
| WeirdML | 47.6% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 69.7% | — |
| CadEval | 56% | — |
| HumanEval+ | 89% | — |
| MBPP+ | 80.2% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
o1: 24.6 (#117), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: —
| Benchmark | o1 | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Cybench | 10% | — |
| METR Time Horizons | 51.1% | — |
Reasoning o1 leads
o1: 27.9 (#111), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 26.4 (#132)
| Benchmark | o1 | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1371 | 1322 |
| SimpleBench | 41.7% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 30.7% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 15% | — |
| EnigmaEval | 5.7% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 91.6% | — |
| DTBench | 74.7% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 65.5% | — |
| LMCA | 22.3% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 141.91 | — |
| LiveBench | 75.7% | — |
Math Too close to call
o1: 36.1 (#175), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 36.3 (#167)
| Benchmark | o1 | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1388 | 1305 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 14.7% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 73.3% | — |
| LiveBench Math | 80.3% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 94.7% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 9.3% | — |
Knowledge o1 leads
o1: 41.5 (#110), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 36.1 (#175)
| Benchmark | o1 | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1361 | 1308 |
| GPQA Diamond | 76.8% | — |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 8% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | 41.1% | — |
| Confabulations | 11.7% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
o1: 34.2 (#93), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: —
| Benchmark | o1 | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1168 | — |
| GeoBench | 80% | — |
| VPCT | 37% | — |
| SpatialViz-Bench | 41.4% | — |
Multilingual o1 leads
o1: 48.6 (#142), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 42.6 (#191)
| Benchmark | o1 | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1358 | 1275 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1394 | 1304 |
| LMArena French | 1344 | 1328 |
| LMArena German | 1337 | 1282 |
| LMArena Korean | 1396 | 1206 |
| LMArena Russian | 1356 | 1268 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1345 | 1336 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1346 | — |
Instruction Following o1 leads
o1: 74.8 (#86), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 68.6 (#187)
| Benchmark | o1 | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1367 | 1299 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 81.5% | — |
Long Context o1 leads
o1: 50.3 (#9), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 39.9 (#166)
| Benchmark | o1 | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1378 | 1312 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | 83.3% | — |
Writing & Preference o1 leads
o1: 55.6 (#144), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 50.2 (#185)
| Benchmark | o1 | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1366 | 1311 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1348 | 1264 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1369 | 1309 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 70.2% | — |
| LiveBench Language | 65.4% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is o1 better than Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct?
o1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.9 to 39.4 on the Noometry Index.
Is o1 or Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct better for coding?
o1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 46.1 versus 39.5 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do o1 and Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct share?
16 benchmarks have published results for both models. o1 has 52 scored results on Noometry and Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct has 16.