# Command R vs Olmo 3.1 32b Think

> Olmo 3.1 32b Think is the stronger model overall, scoring 37.3 to 31.0 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/command-r-vs-olmo-3-1-32b-think
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 15

## Summary

- They share 15 benchmarks with published results for both. Command R scores higher in 0 categories and Olmo 3.1 32b Think in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Olmo 3.1 32b Think leads 24.1 to 13.3.

## Snapshot

| | Command R | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Cohere | Allen Institute for AI (Ai2) |
| Noometry Index | 31.0 | 37.3 |
| Rank | 267 | 191 |
| Context | 128K | — |
| Input $/M | $0.15 | — |
| Output $/M | $0.60 | — |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- Command R: 28.8 (#301)
- Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 37.1 (#186)

| Benchmark | Command R | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1170 | 1292 |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 37.1% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 17.9% | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 45.2% | — |

## Reasoning

- Command R: 13.3 (#329)
- Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 24.1 (#151)

| Benchmark | Command R | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1164 | 1272 |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 21.9% | — |
| DTBench | 46.4% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 33.3% | — |
| LMCA | 9.2% | — |
| LiveBench | 27.5% | — |

## Math

- Command R: 25.8 (#244)
- Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 33.6 (#170)

| Benchmark | Command R | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1155 | 1305 |
| LiveBench Math | 19.4% | — |

## Knowledge

- Command R: 30.5 (#219)
- Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 35.0 (#178)

| Benchmark | Command R | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1138 | 1294 |
| MMLU | 65.2% | — |

## Multilingual

- Command R: 35.9 (#240)
- Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 38.3 (#226)

| Benchmark | Command R | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1174 | 1210 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1182 | 1241 |
| LMArena French | 1161 | 1262 |
| LMArena German | 1176 | 1260 |
| LMArena Russian | 1174 | 1193 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1150 | 1288 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1143 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1162 | — |

## Instruction Following

- Command R: 58.3 (#256)
- Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 65.8 (#213)

| Benchmark | Command R | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1167 | 1246 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 55.6% | — |

## Long Context

- Command R: 36.3 (#226)
- Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 38.6 (#190)

| Benchmark | Command R | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1198 | 1272 |

## Writing & Preference

- Command R: 38.4 (#248)
- Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 46.4 (#215)

| Benchmark | Command R | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1187 | 1271 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1170 | 1226 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1163 | 1252 |
| LiveBench Language | 16.7% | — |

## FAQ

### Is Command R better than Olmo 3.1 32b Think?

Olmo 3.1 32b Think is the stronger model overall, scoring 37.3 to 31.0 on the Noometry Index.

### Is Command R or Olmo 3.1 32b Think better for coding?

Olmo 3.1 32b Think scores higher on coding benchmarks: 37.1 versus 28.8 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do Command R and Olmo 3.1 32b Think share?

15 benchmarks have published results for both models. Command R has 29 scored results on Noometry and Olmo 3.1 32b Think has 15.