Model comparison
Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct vs Phi-3.5-mini
Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct has enough public results to be ranked (#168); Phi-3.5-mini does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.
Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.
Allen Institute for AI (Ai2)
MicrosoftSummary
- The widest gap is in coding, where Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct leads 39.5 to 34.6.
Side by side
| Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct | Phi-3.5-mini | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Allen Institute for AI (Ai2) | Microsoft |
| Noometry Index | 39.4 | 36.9 |
| Released | — | 2024-08-16 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | — | — |
| Max output | — | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Results tracked | 16 | 5 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct leads
Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 39.5 (#157), Phi-3.5-mini: 34.6 (#232)
| Benchmark | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct | Phi-3.5-mini |
|---|---|---|
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 32.8% |
| LMArena Coding | 1347 | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 38.5% |
Reasoning Not comparable
Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 26.4 (#132), Phi-3.5-mini: —
| Benchmark | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct | Phi-3.5-mini |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1322 | — |
| PIQA | — | 81% |
Math Not comparable
Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 36.3 (#167), Phi-3.5-mini: —
| Benchmark | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct | Phi-3.5-mini |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1305 | — |
| GSM8K | — | 86.2% |
Knowledge Not comparable
Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 36.1 (#175), Phi-3.5-mini: —
| Benchmark | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct | Phi-3.5-mini |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1308 | — |
| BoolQ | — | 78% |
Multilingual Not comparable
Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 42.6 (#191), Phi-3.5-mini: —
| Benchmark | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct | Phi-3.5-mini |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1275 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1304 | — |
| LMArena French | 1328 | — |
| LMArena German | 1282 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1206 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1268 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1336 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 68.6 (#187), Phi-3.5-mini: —
| Benchmark | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct | Phi-3.5-mini |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1299 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 39.9 (#166), Phi-3.5-mini: —
| Benchmark | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct | Phi-3.5-mini |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1312 | — |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 50.2 (#185), Phi-3.5-mini: —
| Benchmark | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct | Phi-3.5-mini |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1311 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1264 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1309 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct better than Phi-3.5-mini?
Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct has enough public results to be ranked (#168); Phi-3.5-mini does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.
Is Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct or Phi-3.5-mini better for coding?
Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct scores higher on coding benchmarks: 39.5 versus 34.6 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct and Phi-3.5-mini share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct has 16 scored results on Noometry and Phi-3.5-mini has 5.