# MiniMax-M2 vs Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct

> Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.8 to 36.9 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/minimax-m2-vs-olmo-3-1-32b-instruct
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 15

## Summary

- They share 15 benchmarks with published results for both. MiniMax-M2 scores higher in 7 categories and Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct in 1 category; 4 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct leads 25.4 to 18.6.

## Snapshot

| | MiniMax-M2 | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | MiniMax | Allen Institute for AI (Ai2) |
| Noometry Index | 36.9 | 38.8 |
| Rank | 201 | 168 |
| Context | 205K | — |
| Input $/M | $0.30 | — |
| Output $/M | $1.20 | — |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- MiniMax-M2: 39.1 (#151)
- Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 38.9 (#154)

| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2 | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1370 | 1346 |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 61% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1297 | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- MiniMax-M2: 24.9 (#102)
- Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: —

| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2 | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | 30% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 160.6 | — |

## Reasoning

- MiniMax-M2: 18.6 (#256)
- Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 25.4 (#131)

| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2 | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1357 | 1322 |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 57.8% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 14.8% | — |

## Math

- MiniMax-M2: 34.6 (#158)
- Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 33.6 (#169)

| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2 | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1350 | 1305 |

## Knowledge

- MiniMax-M2: 36.3 (#160)
- Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 35.4 (#175)

| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2 | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1336 | 1307 |

## Multilingual

- MiniMax-M2: 45.6 (#165)
- Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 42.8 (#185)

| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2 | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1314 | 1275 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1367 | 1304 |
| LMArena French | 1336 | 1328 |
| LMArena German | 1366 | 1283 |
| LMArena Russian | 1332 | 1268 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1326 | 1337 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1206 |

## Instruction Following

- MiniMax-M2: 70.4 (#160)
- Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 68.8 (#182)

| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2 | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1329 | 1298 |

## Long Context

- MiniMax-M2: 40.5 (#148)
- Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 39.9 (#161)

| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2 | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1332 | 1312 |

## Writing & Preference

- MiniMax-M2: 53.3 (#157)
- Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 50.4 (#179)

| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2 | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1340 | 1311 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1288 | 1264 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1362 | 1309 |

## FAQ

### Is MiniMax-M2 better than Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct?

Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.8 to 36.9 on the Noometry Index.

### Is MiniMax-M2 or Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct better for coding?

They score almost the same on coding (39.1 vs 38.9); test both on your own repository before choosing.

### How many benchmarks do MiniMax-M2 and Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct share?

15 benchmarks have published results for both models. MiniMax-M2 has 21 scored results on Noometry and Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct has 16.