# GLM-4.5 vs Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct

> GLM-4.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.4 to 38.8 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/glm-4-5-vs-olmo-3-1-32b-instruct
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 16

## Summary

- They share 16 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-4.5 scores higher in 7 categories and Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct in 1 category; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in multilingual, where GLM-4.5 leads 53.0 to 42.8.

## Snapshot

| | GLM-4.5 | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Z.ai (Zhipu) | Allen Institute for AI (Ai2) |
| Noometry Index | 41.4 | 38.8 |
| Rank | 125 | 168 |
| Context | 131K | — |
| Input $/M | $0.60 | — |
| Output $/M | $2.20 | — |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- GLM-4.5: 41.1 (#121)
- Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 38.9 (#154)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.5 | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1434 | 1346 |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 54.2% | — |
| WeirdML | 40.6% | — |
| ALE-Bench | 344.82 | — |
| AlgoTune | 1.52 | — |

## Reasoning

- GLM-4.5: 27.7 (#99)
- Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 25.4 (#131)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.5 | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1430 | 1322 |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 57.9% | — |

## Math

- GLM-4.5: 36.3 (#119)
- Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 33.6 (#169)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.5 | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1427 | 1305 |

## Knowledge

- GLM-4.5: 35.5 (#172)
- Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 35.4 (#175)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.5 | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1433 | 1307 |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 8.3% | — |
| Confabulations | 11.3% | — |

## Multilingual

- GLM-4.5: 53.0 (#74)
- Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 42.8 (#185)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.5 | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1417 | 1275 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1465 | 1304 |
| LMArena French | 1423 | 1328 |
| LMArena German | 1406 | 1283 |
| LMArena Korean | 1382 | 1206 |
| LMArena Russian | 1414 | 1268 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1454 | 1337 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1416 | — |

## Instruction Following

- GLM-4.5: 74.3 (#100)
- Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 68.8 (#182)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.5 | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1405 | 1298 |

## Long Context

- GLM-4.5: 38.2 (#196)
- Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 39.9 (#161)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.5 | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1413 | 1312 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | 58.3% | — |

## Writing & Preference

- GLM-4.5: 57.7 (#121)
- Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 50.4 (#179)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.5 | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1430 | 1311 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1395 | 1264 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1415 | 1309 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 73.4% | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1343 | — |

## FAQ

### Is GLM-4.5 better than Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct?

GLM-4.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.4 to 38.8 on the Noometry Index.

### Is GLM-4.5 or Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct better for coding?

GLM-4.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 41.1 versus 38.9 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do GLM-4.5 and Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct share?

16 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-4.5 has 27 scored results on Noometry and Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct has 16.