# o1 vs Olmo 3.1 32b Think

> o1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.6 to 37.3 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/o1-vs-olmo-3-1-32b-think
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 15

## Summary

- They share 15 benchmarks with published results for both. o1 scores higher in 8 categories and Olmo 3.1 32b Think in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in long context, where o1 leads 50.3 to 38.6.
- Olmo 3.1 32b Think has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | o1 | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenAI | Allen Institute for AI (Ai2) |
| Noometry Index | 40.6 | 37.3 |
| Rank | 140 | 191 |
| Context | 200K | — |
| Input $/M | $15 | — |
| Output $/M | $60 | — |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |

## Coding

- o1: 45.7 (#64)
- Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 37.1 (#186)

| Benchmark | o1 | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1367 | 1292 |
| Aider Polyglot | 61.7% | — |
| WeirdML | 47.6% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 69.7% | — |
| CadEval | 56% | — |
| HumanEval+ | 89% | — |
| MBPP+ | 80.2% | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- o1: 24.3 (#111)
- Olmo 3.1 32b Think: —

| Benchmark | o1 | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| Cybench | 10% | — |
| METR Time Horizons | 51.1% | — |

## Reasoning

- o1: 27.5 (#103)
- Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 24.1 (#151)

| Benchmark | o1 | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1372 | 1272 |
| SimpleBench | 41.7% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 30.7% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 15% | — |
| EnigmaEval | 5.7% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 91.6% | — |
| DTBench | 74.7% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 65.5% | — |
| LMCA | 22.3% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 141.92 | — |
| LiveBench | 75.7% | — |

## Math

- o1: 34.9 (#150)
- Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 33.6 (#170)

| Benchmark | o1 | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1388 | 1305 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 14.7% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 73.3% | — |
| LiveBench Math | 80.3% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 94.7% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 9.3% | — |

## Knowledge

- o1: 41.5 (#101)
- Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 35.0 (#178)

| Benchmark | o1 | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1362 | 1294 |
| GPQA Diamond | 76.8% | — |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 8% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | 41.1% | — |
| Confabulations | 11.7% | — |

## Multimodal

- o1: 33.6 (#87)
- Olmo 3.1 32b Think: —

| Benchmark | o1 | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1168 | — |
| GeoBench | 80% | — |
| VPCT | 37% | — |
| SpatialViz-Bench | 41.4% | — |

## Multilingual

- o1: 48.8 (#137)
- Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 38.3 (#226)

| Benchmark | o1 | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1359 | 1210 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1394 | 1241 |
| LMArena French | 1343 | 1262 |
| LMArena German | 1337 | 1260 |
| LMArena Russian | 1356 | 1193 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1345 | 1288 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1346 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1396 | — |

## Instruction Following

- o1: 75.0 (#82)
- Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 65.8 (#213)

| Benchmark | o1 | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1368 | 1246 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 81.5% | — |

## Long Context

- o1: 50.3 (#9)
- Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 38.6 (#190)

| Benchmark | o1 | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1378 | 1272 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | 83.3% | — |

## Writing & Preference

- o1: 55.8 (#139)
- Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 46.4 (#215)

| Benchmark | o1 | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1366 | 1271 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1347 | 1226 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1368 | 1252 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 70.2% | — |
| LiveBench Language | 65.4% | — |

## FAQ

### Is o1 better than Olmo 3.1 32b Think?

o1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.6 to 37.3 on the Noometry Index.

### Is o1 or Olmo 3.1 32b Think better for coding?

o1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 45.7 versus 37.1 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do o1 and Olmo 3.1 32b Think share?

15 benchmarks have published results for both models. o1 has 52 scored results on Noometry and Olmo 3.1 32b Think has 15.