# DeepSeek LLM 67B vs Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct

> Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.8 to 24.8 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/deepseek-llm-67b-vs-olmo-3-1-32b-instruct
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 10

## Summary

- They share 10 benchmarks with published results for both. DeepSeek LLM 67B scores higher in 0 categories and Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct leads 35.4 to 7.1.

## Snapshot

| | DeepSeek LLM 67B | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | DeepSeek | Allen Institute for AI (Ai2) |
| Noometry Index | 24.8 | 38.8 |
| Rank | 341 | 168 |
| Context | — | — |
| Input $/M | — | — |
| Output $/M | — | — |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- DeepSeek LLM 67B: 31.3 (#273)
- Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 38.9 (#154)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek LLM 67B | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1096 | 1346 |

## Reasoning

- DeepSeek LLM 67B: 15.9 (#300)
- Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 25.4 (#131)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek LLM 67B | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1070 | 1322 |
| Chess Puzzles | 0% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 110.54 | — |

## Math

- DeepSeek LLM 67B: 8.1 (#318)
- Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 33.6 (#169)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek LLM 67B | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1108 | 1305 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 0.8% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 6.4% | — |

## Knowledge

- DeepSeek LLM 67B: 7.1 (#308)
- Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 35.4 (#175)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek LLM 67B | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 24.6% | — |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1307 |

## Multilingual

- DeepSeek LLM 67B: 29.5 (#262)
- Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 42.8 (#185)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek LLM 67B | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1073 | 1275 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1132 | 1304 |
| LMArena French | — | 1328 |
| LMArena German | — | 1283 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1206 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1268 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1337 |

## Instruction Following

- DeepSeek LLM 67B: 55.7 (#272)
- Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 68.8 (#182)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek LLM 67B | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1079 | 1298 |

## Long Context

- DeepSeek LLM 67B: 33.1 (#260)
- Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 39.9 (#161)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek LLM 67B | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1092 | 1312 |

## Writing & Preference

- DeepSeek LLM 67B: 31.8 (#277)
- Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 50.4 (#179)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek LLM 67B | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1105 | 1311 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1067 | 1264 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1082 | 1309 |

## FAQ

### Is DeepSeek LLM 67B better than Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct?

Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.8 to 24.8 on the Noometry Index.

### Is DeepSeek LLM 67B or Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct better for coding?

Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct scores higher on coding benchmarks: 38.9 versus 31.3 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do DeepSeek LLM 67B and Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct share?

10 benchmarks have published results for both models. DeepSeek LLM 67B has 15 scored results on Noometry and Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct has 16.