# Mercury 2 vs Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct

> Mercury 2 and Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct score almost the same on the Noometry Index (38.8 vs 38.8), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/mercury-2-vs-olmo-3-1-32b-instruct
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 11

## Summary

- They share 11 benchmarks with published results for both. Mercury 2 scores higher in 5 categories and Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct in 2 categories; 5 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in coding, where Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct leads 38.9 to 33.2.
- Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | Mercury 2 | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Inception | Allen Institute for AI (Ai2) |
| Noometry Index | 38.8 | 38.8 |
| Rank | 167 | 168 |
| Context | 128K | — |
| Input $/M | $0.25 | — |
| Output $/M | $0.75 | — |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |

## Coding

- Mercury 2: 33.2 (#250)
- Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 38.9 (#154)

| Benchmark | Mercury 2 | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1391 | 1346 |
| LMArena WebDev | 1170 | — |
| SciCode | 38.7% | — |
| WeirdML | 43.2% | — |
| ALE-Bench | 785.58 | — |

## Reasoning

- Mercury 2: 23.0 (#170)
- Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 25.4 (#131)

| Benchmark | Mercury 2 | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1362 | 1322 |
| CritPt | 0.8% | — |

## Math

- Mercury 2: —
- Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 33.6 (#169)

| Benchmark | Mercury 2 | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | — | 1305 |

## Knowledge

- Mercury 2: 35.6 (#170)
- Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 35.4 (#175)

| Benchmark | Mercury 2 | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1358 | 1307 |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 12.3% | — |

## Multilingual

- Mercury 2: 46.8 (#153)
- Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 42.8 (#185)

| Benchmark | Mercury 2 | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1331 | 1275 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1416 | 1304 |
| LMArena Russian | 1303 | 1268 |
| LMArena French | — | 1328 |
| LMArena German | — | 1283 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1206 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1337 |

## Instruction Following

- Mercury 2: 70.4 (#161)
- Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 68.8 (#182)

| Benchmark | Mercury 2 | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1328 | 1298 |

## Long Context

- Mercury 2: 40.4 (#149)
- Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 39.9 (#161)

| Benchmark | Mercury 2 | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1329 | 1312 |

## Writing & Preference

- Mercury 2: 54.0 (#151)
- Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 50.4 (#179)

| Benchmark | Mercury 2 | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1355 | 1311 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1289 | 1264 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1358 | 1309 |

## FAQ

### Is Mercury 2 better than Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct?

Mercury 2 and Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct score almost the same on the Noometry Index (38.8 vs 38.8), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.

### Is Mercury 2 or Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct better for coding?

Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct scores higher on coding benchmarks: 38.9 versus 33.2 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do Mercury 2 and Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct share?

11 benchmarks have published results for both models. Mercury 2 has 17 scored results on Noometry and Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct has 16.