# Gemma 1.1 2b IT vs Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct

> Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 32.7 to 29.3 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/gemma-1-1-2b-it-vs-olmo-2-0325-32b-instruct
- Last updated: 2026-10-12
- Shared benchmarks: 11

## Summary

- They share 11 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 1.1 2b IT scores higher in 2 categories and Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct in 6 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct leads 42.1 to 25.1.

## Snapshot

| | Gemma 1.1 2b IT | Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Google | Allen Institute for AI (Ai2) |
| Noometry Index | 29.3 | 32.7 |
| Rank | 313 | 254 |
| Context | — | — |
| Input $/M | — | — |
| Output $/M | — | — |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 30.1 (#299)
- Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 35.2 (#227)

| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 2b IT | Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1034 | 1210 |
| HumanEval+ | 17.7% | — |
| MBPP+ | 23.3% | — |

## Reasoning

- Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 19.1 (#270)
- Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 23.6 (#175)

| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 2b IT | Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1005 | 1208 |

## Math

- Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 30.8 (#232)
- Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 26.8 (#255)

| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 2b IT | Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1047 | 1208 |
| Omni-MATH | — | 16.1% |

## Knowledge

- Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 26.5 (#258)
- Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 19.5 (#279)

| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 2b IT | Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| MMLU-Pro | — | 41.4% |
| GPQA (HELM) | — | 28.7% |
| LMArena Expert | 970 | — |

## Multilingual

- Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 24.6 (#289)
- Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 34.8 (#248)

| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 2b IT | Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 988 | 1160 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1012 | 1192 |
| LMArena Russian | 990 | 1187 |
| LMArena German | 944 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 899 | — |

## Instruction Following

- Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 49.9 (#299)
- Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 61.5 (#244)

| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 2b IT | Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 992 | 1186 |
| IFEval | — | 78% |

## Long Context

- Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 30.6 (#286)
- Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 36.2 (#234)

| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 2b IT | Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1003 | 1194 |

## Writing & Preference

- Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 25.1 (#306)
- Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 42.1 (#236)

| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 2b IT | Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1022 | 1218 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 998 | 1199 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 959 | 1221 |
| WildBench | — | 73.4% |

## FAQ

### Is Gemma 1.1 2b IT better than Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct?

Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 32.7 to 29.3 on the Noometry Index.

### Is Gemma 1.1 2b IT or Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct better for coding?

Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct scores higher on coding benchmarks: 35.2 versus 30.1 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do Gemma 1.1 2b IT and Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct share?

11 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 1.1 2b IT has 16 scored results on Noometry and Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct has 16.