# Claude Opus 4.1 vs Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct

> Claude Opus 4.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.8 to 38.8 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/claude-opus-4-1-vs-olmo-3-1-32b-instruct
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 16

## Summary

- They share 16 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 4.1 scores higher in 7 categories and Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct in 1 category; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Claude Opus 4.1 leads 62.6 to 50.4.
- Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | Claude Opus 4.1 | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | Allen Institute for AI (Ai2) |
| Noometry Index | 40.8 | 38.8 |
| Rank | 136 | 168 |
| Context | 200K | — |
| Input $/M | $15 | — |
| Output $/M | $75 | — |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |

## Coding

- Claude Opus 4.1: 44.3 (#69)
- Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 38.9 (#154)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1479 | 1346 |
| SWE-bench Verified | 73.3% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1390 | — |
| WeirdML | 45.9% | — |
| ALE-Bench | 674.77 | — |
| AlgoTune | 1.34 | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Claude Opus 4.1: 34.8 (#38)
- Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: —

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | 38% | — |
| GDPval | 43.6% | — |
| Cybench | 42% | — |
| DeepResearch Bench | 48.3% | — |
| LMArena Search | 1148 | — |
| METR Time Horizons | 66.8% | — |

## Reasoning

- Claude Opus 4.1: 31.6 (#70)
- Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 25.4 (#131)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1443 | 1322 |
| SimpleBench | 60% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 7% | — |
| EnigmaEval | 7.2% | — |
| EBR-Bench | 7.9% | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 21% | — |
| DTBench | 80% | — |
| LMCA | 37.1% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 144.11 | — |
| ForecastBench | 62 | — |

## Math

- Claude Opus 4.1: 22.0 (#267)
- Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 33.6 (#169)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1430 | 1305 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 12.6% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 2.4% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 68.9% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 7.2% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 4.2% | — |

## Knowledge

- Claude Opus 4.1: 41.9 (#93)
- Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 35.4 (#175)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1439 | 1307 |
| GPQA Diamond | 77.3% | — |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 11.5% | — |
| Confabulations | 17.1% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 11.8% | — |

## Multimodal

- Claude Opus 4.1: 26.2 (#114)
- Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: —

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| VPCT | 35% | — |

## Multilingual

- Claude Opus 4.1: 52.1 (#90)
- Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 42.8 (#185)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1405 | 1275 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1427 | 1304 |
| LMArena French | 1432 | 1328 |
| LMArena German | 1412 | 1283 |
| LMArena Korean | 1381 | 1206 |
| LMArena Russian | 1421 | 1268 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1448 | 1337 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1378 | — |

## Instruction Following

- Claude Opus 4.1: 75.8 (#53)
- Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 68.8 (#182)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1436 | 1298 |

## Long Context

- Claude Opus 4.1: 44.5 (#60)
- Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 39.9 (#161)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1455 | 1312 |

## Writing & Preference

- Claude Opus 4.1: 62.6 (#70)
- Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 50.4 (#179)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1419 | 1311 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1412 | 1264 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1444 | 1309 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 84.7% | — |

## FAQ

### Is Claude Opus 4.1 better than Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct?

Claude Opus 4.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.8 to 38.8 on the Noometry Index.

### Is Claude Opus 4.1 or Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct better for coding?

Claude Opus 4.1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 44.3 versus 38.9 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 4.1 and Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct share?

16 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 4.1 has 48 scored results on Noometry and Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct has 16.