Noometry

Model comparison

o4-mini vs Olmo 3.1 32b Think

o4-mini is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.6 to 37.9 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 15 shared benchmarks.

o4-mini OpenAI

41.6

Rank #132 Confirmed

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

37.9

Rank #191 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 15 benchmarks with published results for both. o4-mini scores higher in 7 categories and Olmo 3.1 32b Think in 1 category; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in instruction following, where o4-mini leads 75.2 to 65.6.
  • Olmo 3.1 32b Think has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

o4-miniOlmo 3.1 32b Think
ProviderOpenAIAllen Institute for AI (Ai2)
Noometry Index41.637.9
Released2025-04-16—
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window200K—
Max output100K—
Input $ / M tokens$1.10—
Output $ / M tokens$4.40—
Results tracked6015

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

Category by category

Coding o4-mini leads

o4-mini: 40.9 (#127), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 37.7 (#189)

Benchmarko4-miniOlmo 3.1 32b Think
LMArena Coding13681291
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)45%—
Aider Polyglot72%—
GSO3.6%—
WeirdML52.6%—
CadEval62%—
ALE-Bench826.17—
AlgoTune1.72—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

o4-mini: 32.6 (#61), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: —

Benchmarko4-miniOlmo 3.1 32b Think
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard53.2%—
GDPval25.3%—
METR Time Horizons63.9%—

Reasoning Too close to call

o4-mini: 24.6 (#162), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 25.2 (#150)

Benchmarko4-miniOlmo 3.1 32b Think
LMArena Hard Prompts13511272
ARC-AGI-26.1%—
SimpleBench38.7%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark67.6%—
ARC-AGI-158.7%—
CritPt0.6%—
Chess Puzzles26%—
EnigmaEval9.2%—
Mystery Game Puzzles5%—
DTBench77.6%—
LMCA26.5%—
Epoch Capabilities Index145.64—
ForecastBench61.8—

Math o4-mini leads

o4-mini: 40.8 (#89), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 36.3 (#168)

Benchmarko4-miniOlmo 3.1 32b Think
LMArena Math13891305
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)36.1%—
FrontierMath Tier 44.9%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202581.7%—
Omni-MATH72%—
MATH Level 597.8%—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)24.8%—
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)6.3%—

Knowledge o4-mini leads

o4-mini: 43.6 (#91), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 35.7 (#181)

Benchmarko4-miniOlmo 3.1 32b Think
LMArena Expert13431295
GPQA Diamond79.6%—
Humanity's Last Exam18.1%—
SimpleQA Verified19.6%—
MMLU-Pro82%—
Confabulations15.8%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate18.6%—
GPQA (HELM)73.5%—

Multimodal Not comparable

o4-mini: 40.2 (#49), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: —

Benchmarko4-miniOlmo 3.1 32b Think
LMArena Vision1194—
GeoBench64%—
VPCT57.5%—

Multilingual o4-mini leads

o4-mini: 47.0 (#154), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 38.1 (#231)

Benchmarko4-miniOlmo 3.1 32b Think
LMArena Non-English13371209
LMArena Chinese13541242
LMArena French13641260
LMArena German13361262
LMArena Russian13341193
LMArena Spanish13471289
LMArena Japanese1308—
LMArena Korean1312—

Instruction Following o4-mini leads

o4-mini: 75.2 (#68), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 65.6 (#218)

Benchmarko4-miniOlmo 3.1 32b Think
LMArena Instruction Following13211247
IFEval92.8%—

Long Context o4-mini leads

o4-mini: 45.5 (#33), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 38.6 (#195)

Benchmarko4-miniOlmo 3.1 32b Think
LMArena Longer Query13151272
Fiction.LiveBench77.8%—

Writing & Preference o4-mini leads

o4-mini: 54.0 (#152), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 46.2 (#220)

Benchmarko4-miniOlmo 3.1 32b Think
LMArena Text13531272
LMArena Creative Writing12941226
LMArena Multi-Turn13501252
Short-Story Creative Writing75%—
WildBench85.4%—

Frequently asked questions

Is o4-mini better than Olmo 3.1 32b Think?

o4-mini is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.6 to 37.9 on the Noometry Index.

Is o4-mini or Olmo 3.1 32b Think better for coding?

o4-mini scores higher on coding benchmarks: 40.9 versus 37.7 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do o4-mini and Olmo 3.1 32b Think share?

15 benchmarks have published results for both models. o4-mini has 60 scored results on Noometry and Olmo 3.1 32b Think has 15.

Related comparisons

Go deeper