# Mercury 2.5 vs Olmo 3.1 32b Think

> Olmo 3.1 32b Think is the stronger model overall, scoring 37.9 to 33.5 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/mercury-2-5-vs-olmo-3-1-32b-think
- Last updated: 2026-10-12
- Shared benchmarks: 0

## Summary

- The widest gap is in math, where Olmo 3.1 32b Think leads 36.3 to 23.3.
- Olmo 3.1 32b Think has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | Mercury 2.5 | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Inception | Allen Institute for AI (Ai2) |
| Noometry Index | 33.5 | 37.9 |
| Rank | 242 | 191 |
| Context | 260K | — |
| Input $/M | $0.04 | — |
| Output $/M | $0.15 | — |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |

## Coding

- Mercury 2.5: 39.5 (#156)
- Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 37.7 (#189)

| Benchmark | Mercury 2.5 | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | 38.5% | — |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1291 |
| ALE-Bench | 301.65 | — |

## Reasoning

- Mercury 2.5: 22.4 (#193)
- Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 25.2 (#150)

| Benchmark | Mercury 2.5 | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| CritPt | 0% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1272 |

## Math

- Mercury 2.5: 23.3 (#272)
- Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 36.3 (#168)

| Benchmark | Mercury 2.5 | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| ProofBench | 3% | — |
| LMArena Math | — | 1305 |

## Knowledge

- Mercury 2.5: —
- Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 35.7 (#181)

| Benchmark | Mercury 2.5 | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | — | 1295 |

## Multilingual

- Mercury 2.5: —
- Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 38.1 (#231)

| Benchmark | Mercury 2.5 | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1209 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1242 |
| LMArena French | — | 1260 |
| LMArena German | — | 1262 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1193 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1289 |

## Instruction Following

- Mercury 2.5: —
- Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 65.6 (#218)

| Benchmark | Mercury 2.5 | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1247 |

## Long Context

- Mercury 2.5: —
- Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 38.6 (#195)

| Benchmark | Mercury 2.5 | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1272 |

## Writing & Preference

- Mercury 2.5: —
- Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 46.2 (#220)

| Benchmark | Mercury 2.5 | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1272 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1226 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1252 |

## FAQ

### Is Mercury 2.5 better than Olmo 3.1 32b Think?

Olmo 3.1 32b Think is the stronger model overall, scoring 37.9 to 33.5 on the Noometry Index.

### Is Mercury 2.5 or Olmo 3.1 32b Think better for coding?

Mercury 2.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 39.5 versus 37.7 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do Mercury 2.5 and Olmo 3.1 32b Think share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Mercury 2.5 has 4 scored results on Noometry and Olmo 3.1 32b Think has 15.