# MiniMax-M2 vs Olmo 3.1 32b Think

> MiniMax-M2 and Olmo 3.1 32b Think score almost the same on the Noometry Index (37.4 vs 37.9), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/minimax-m2-vs-olmo-3-1-32b-think
- Last updated: 2026-10-12
- 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 Think in 1 category; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in multilingual, where MiniMax-M2 leads 45.3 to 38.1.

## Snapshot

| | MiniMax-M2 | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | MiniMax | Allen Institute for AI (Ai2) |
| Noometry Index | 37.4 | 37.9 |
| Rank | 204 | 191 |
| Context | 205K | — |
| Input $/M | $0.30 | — |
| Output $/M | $1.20 | — |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- MiniMax-M2: 39.3 (#159)
- Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 37.7 (#189)

| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2 | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1370 | 1291 |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 61% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1297 | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- MiniMax-M2: 25.1 (#109)
- Olmo 3.1 32b Think: —

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

## Reasoning

- MiniMax-M2: 19.4 (#258)
- Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 25.2 (#150)

| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2 | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1357 | 1272 |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 57.8% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 14.8% | — |

## Math

- MiniMax-M2: 37.3 (#160)
- Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 36.3 (#168)

| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2 | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1352 | 1305 |

## Knowledge

- MiniMax-M2: 37.0 (#163)
- Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 35.7 (#181)

| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2 | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1337 | 1295 |

## Multilingual

- MiniMax-M2: 45.3 (#171)
- Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 38.1 (#231)

| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2 | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1313 | 1209 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1366 | 1242 |
| LMArena French | 1335 | 1260 |
| LMArena German | 1355 | 1262 |
| LMArena Russian | 1331 | 1193 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1326 | 1289 |

## Instruction Following

- MiniMax-M2: 70.2 (#166)
- Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 65.6 (#218)

| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2 | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1328 | 1247 |

## Long Context

- MiniMax-M2: 40.5 (#153)
- Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 38.6 (#195)

| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2 | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1331 | 1272 |

## Writing & Preference

- MiniMax-M2: 53.0 (#162)
- Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 46.2 (#220)

| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2 | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1340 | 1272 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1286 | 1226 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1361 | 1252 |

## FAQ

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

MiniMax-M2 and Olmo 3.1 32b Think score almost the same on the Noometry Index (37.4 vs 37.9), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.

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

MiniMax-M2 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 39.3 versus 37.7 in the Noometry coding category.

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

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