Model comparison
Olmo 3.1 32b Think vs Solar Pro4
Solar Pro4 is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.5 to 37.3 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 15 shared benchmarks.
Allen Institute for AI (Ai2)
UpstageSummary
- They share 15 benchmarks with published results for both. Olmo 3.1 32b Think scores higher in 0 categories and Solar Pro4 in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in multilingual, where Solar Pro4 leads 49.0 to 38.3.
- Olmo 3.1 32b Think has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Olmo 3.1 32b Think | Solar Pro4 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Allen Institute for AI (Ai2) | Upstage |
| Noometry Index | 37.3 | 41.5 |
| Released | — | 2026-08-06 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | — | 524K |
| Max output | — | 131K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.30 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $1.20 |
| Results tracked | 15 | 18 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Solar Pro4 leads
Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 37.1 (#186), Solar Pro4: 39.9 (#135)
| Benchmark | Olmo 3.1 32b Think | Solar Pro4 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1292 | 1439 |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1371 |
Reasoning Solar Pro4 leads
Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 24.1 (#151), Solar Pro4: 27.3 (#107)
| Benchmark | Olmo 3.1 32b Think | Solar Pro4 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1272 | 1398 |
Math Solar Pro4 leads
Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 33.6 (#170), Solar Pro4: 36.1 (#129)
| Benchmark | Olmo 3.1 32b Think | Solar Pro4 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1305 | 1418 |
Knowledge Solar Pro4 leads
Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 35.0 (#178), Solar Pro4: 39.0 (#128)
| Benchmark | Olmo 3.1 32b Think | Solar Pro4 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1294 | 1421 |
Multilingual Solar Pro4 leads
Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 38.3 (#226), Solar Pro4: 49.0 (#134)
| Benchmark | Olmo 3.1 32b Think | Solar Pro4 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1210 | 1362 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1241 | 1417 |
| LMArena French | 1262 | 1403 |
| LMArena German | 1260 | 1351 |
| LMArena Russian | 1193 | 1360 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1288 | 1408 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1300 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1383 |
Instruction Following Solar Pro4 leads
Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 65.8 (#213), Solar Pro4: 72.8 (#128)
| Benchmark | Olmo 3.1 32b Think | Solar Pro4 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1246 | 1376 |
Long Context Solar Pro4 leads
Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 38.6 (#190), Solar Pro4: 42.0 (#125)
| Benchmark | Olmo 3.1 32b Think | Solar Pro4 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1272 | 1379 |
Writing & Preference Solar Pro4 leads
Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 46.4 (#215), Solar Pro4: 56.7 (#133)
| Benchmark | Olmo 3.1 32b Think | Solar Pro4 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1271 | 1386 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1226 | 1313 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1252 | 1391 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Olmo 3.1 32b Think better than Solar Pro4?
Solar Pro4 is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.5 to 37.3 on the Noometry Index.
Is Olmo 3.1 32b Think or Solar Pro4 better for coding?
Solar Pro4 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 39.9 versus 37.1 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Olmo 3.1 32b Think and Solar Pro4 share?
15 benchmarks have published results for both models. Olmo 3.1 32b Think has 15 scored results on Noometry and Solar Pro4 has 18.