Model comparison
Olmo 3.1 32b Think vs Sonar
Olmo 3.1 32b Think and Sonar score almost the same on the Noometry Index (37.9 vs 38.5), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.
Allen Institute for AI (Ai2)
PerplexitySummary
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Sonar leads 52.6 to 46.2.
- Olmo 3.1 32b Think has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Olmo 3.1 32b Think | Sonar | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Allen Institute for AI (Ai2) | Perplexity |
| Noometry Index | 37.9 | 38.5 |
| Released | — | 2024-01-01 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | — | 128K |
| Max output | — | 4K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $1 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $1 |
| Results tracked | 15 | 7 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Olmo 3.1 32b Think leads
Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 37.7 (#189), Sonar: 35.7 (#221)
| Benchmark | Olmo 3.1 32b Think | Sonar |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Coding | — | 35.1% |
| LMArena Coding | 1291 | — |
Reasoning Olmo 3.1 32b Think leads
Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 25.2 (#150), Sonar: 21.1 (#227)
| Benchmark | Olmo 3.1 32b Think | Sonar |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Reasoning | — | 46.3% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1272 | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | — | 37.9% |
| LiveBench | — | 46.9% |
Math Olmo 3.1 32b Think leads
Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 36.3 (#168), Sonar: 33.7 (#200)
| Benchmark | Olmo 3.1 32b Think | Sonar |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Math | — | 41.6% |
| LMArena Math | 1305 | — |
Knowledge Not comparable
Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 35.7 (#181), Sonar: —
| Benchmark | Olmo 3.1 32b Think | Sonar |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1295 | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 38.1 (#231), Sonar: —
| Benchmark | Olmo 3.1 32b Think | Sonar |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1209 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1242 | — |
| LMArena French | 1260 | — |
| LMArena German | 1262 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1193 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1289 | — |
Instruction Following Sonar leads
Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 65.6 (#218), Sonar: 71.4 (#150)
| Benchmark | Olmo 3.1 32b Think | Sonar |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Instruction Following | — | 76.2% |
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1247 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 38.6 (#195), Sonar: —
| Benchmark | Olmo 3.1 32b Think | Sonar |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1272 | — |
Writing & Preference Sonar leads
Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 46.2 (#220), Sonar: 52.6 (#167)
| Benchmark | Olmo 3.1 32b Think | Sonar |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1272 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1226 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1252 | — |
| LiveBench Language | — | 44.1% |
Frequently asked questions
Is Olmo 3.1 32b Think better than Sonar?
Olmo 3.1 32b Think and Sonar score almost the same on the Noometry Index (37.9 vs 38.5), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Is Olmo 3.1 32b Think or Sonar better for coding?
Olmo 3.1 32b Think scores higher on coding benchmarks: 37.7 versus 35.7 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Olmo 3.1 32b Think and Sonar share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Olmo 3.1 32b Think has 15 scored results on Noometry and Sonar has 7.