Model comparison
Claude Opus 5 vs Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct
Claude Opus 5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 67.7 to 38.8 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 16 shared benchmarks.
Allen Institute for AI (Ai2)Summary
- They share 16 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 5 scores higher in 8 categories and Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Claude Opus 5 leads 86.1 to 33.6.
- Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Claude Opus 5 | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | Allen Institute for AI (Ai2) |
| Noometry Index | 67.7 | 38.8 |
| Released | 2026-07-24 | — |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 1M | — |
| Max output | 128K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $5 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $25 | — |
| Results tracked | 57 | 16 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Claude Opus 5 leads
Claude Opus 5: 67.0 (#5), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 38.9 (#154)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5 | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1533 | 1346 |
| DeepSWE | 73.6% | — |
| FrontierCode | 53.4% | — |
| CursorBench | 46.6% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1694 | — |
| FrontierSWE | 52% | — |
| SciCode | 56.4% | — |
| WeirdML | 91.8% | — |
| ALE-Bench | 2,165 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Claude Opus 5: 55.5 (#1), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: —
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5 | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | 65.8% | — |
| OSWorld 2.0 | 31.4% | — |
| τ²-bench Banking | 48.7% | — |
| PostTrainBench | 35% | — |
| BALROG | 63.4% | — |
| GBAEval | 79.6% | — |
| GDP.pdf | 24% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 11,182 | — |
Reasoning Claude Opus 5 leads
Claude Opus 5: 77.1 (#3), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 25.4 (#131)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5 | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1525 | 1322 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 90.4% | — |
| SimpleBench | 80.6% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 94.3% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 97.5% | — |
| CritPt | 29.1% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 42% | — |
| EBR-Bench | 45.7% | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 59% | — |
| DTBench | 97.9% | — |
| LMCA | 64.5% | — |
| Bench to the Future 3 | 0.12 | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 162.67 | — |
Math Claude Opus 5 leads
Claude Opus 5: 86.1 (#6), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 33.6 (#169)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5 | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1533 | 1305 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 85.6% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 73.2% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 98.9% | — |
| ProofBench | 99% | — |
Knowledge Claude Opus 5 leads
Claude Opus 5: 66.8 (#8), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 35.4 (#175)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5 | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1558 | 1307 |
| GPQA Diamond | 93.9% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | 59.9% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Claude Opus 5: 51.1 (#6), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: —
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5 | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1321 | — |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | 30.4% | — |
| Furniture Assembly | 60.8% | — |
| LMArena Document | 1516 | — |
Multilingual Claude Opus 5 leads
Claude Opus 5: 58.8 (#3), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 42.8 (#185)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5 | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1500 | 1275 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1575 | 1304 |
| LMArena French | 1522 | 1328 |
| LMArena German | 1522 | 1283 |
| LMArena Korean | 1526 | 1206 |
| LMArena Russian | 1507 | 1268 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1519 | 1337 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1510 | — |
Instruction Following Claude Opus 5 leads
Claude Opus 5: 79.3 (#5), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 68.8 (#182)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5 | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1516 | 1298 |
Long Context Claude Opus 5 leads
Claude Opus 5: 46.5 (#20), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 39.9 (#161)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5 | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1516 | 1312 |
Writing & Preference Claude Opus 5 leads
Claude Opus 5: 79.3 (#2), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 50.4 (#179)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5 | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1506 | 1311 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1491 | 1264 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1496 | 1309 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 2133 | — |
| EQ-Bench 4 | 1385 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Claude Opus 5 better than Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct?
Claude Opus 5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 67.7 to 38.8 on the Noometry Index.
Is Claude Opus 5 or Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct better for coding?
Claude Opus 5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 67.0 versus 38.9 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 5 and Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct share?
16 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 5 has 57 scored results on Noometry and Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct has 16.