# MiMo-V2-Pro vs Olmo 3.1 32b Think

> MiMo-V2-Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.4 to 37.3 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/mimo-v2-pro-vs-olmo-3-1-32b-think
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 15

## Summary

- They share 15 benchmarks with published results for both. MiMo-V2-Pro scores higher in 7 categories and Olmo 3.1 32b Think in 1 category; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where MiMo-V2-Pro leads 62.9 to 46.4.
- Olmo 3.1 32b Think has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | MiMo-V2-Pro | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Xiaomi | Allen Institute for AI (Ai2) |
| Noometry Index | 42.4 | 37.3 |
| Rank | 102 | 191 |
| Context | 1.05M | — |
| Input $/M | $0.43 | — |
| Output $/M | $0.87 | — |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |

## Coding

- MiMo-V2-Pro: 43.4 (#76)
- Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 37.1 (#186)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Pro | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1476 | 1292 |
| LMArena WebDev | 1433 | — |
| ALE-Bench | 785.17 | — |

## Reasoning

- MiMo-V2-Pro: 21.3 (#200)
- Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 24.1 (#151)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Pro | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1457 | 1272 |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 25.8% | — |
| Thematic Generalization | 45.9% | — |

## Math

- MiMo-V2-Pro: 36.7 (#104)
- Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 33.6 (#170)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Pro | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1447 | 1305 |

## Knowledge

- MiMo-V2-Pro: 40.8 (#106)
- Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 35.0 (#178)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Pro | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1479 | 1294 |

## Multilingual

- MiMo-V2-Pro: 52.9 (#77)
- Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 38.3 (#226)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Pro | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1416 | 1210 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1455 | 1241 |
| LMArena French | 1470 | 1262 |
| LMArena German | 1417 | 1260 |
| LMArena Russian | 1427 | 1193 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1458 | 1288 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1366 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1401 | — |

## Instruction Following

- MiMo-V2-Pro: 76.2 (#46)
- Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 65.8 (#213)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Pro | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1444 | 1246 |

## Long Context

- MiMo-V2-Pro: 41.5 (#133)
- Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 38.6 (#190)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Pro | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1455 | 1272 |
| CL-bench | 15.7% | — |
| CL-bench Life | 6.9% | — |

## Writing & Preference

- MiMo-V2-Pro: 62.9 (#67)
- Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 46.4 (#215)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Pro | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1436 | 1271 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1415 | 1226 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1456 | 1252 |

## FAQ

### Is MiMo-V2-Pro better than Olmo 3.1 32b Think?

MiMo-V2-Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.4 to 37.3 on the Noometry Index.

### Is MiMo-V2-Pro or Olmo 3.1 32b Think better for coding?

MiMo-V2-Pro scores higher on coding benchmarks: 43.4 versus 37.1 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do MiMo-V2-Pro and Olmo 3.1 32b Think share?

15 benchmarks have published results for both models. MiMo-V2-Pro has 23 scored results on Noometry and Olmo 3.1 32b Think has 15.