Model comparison
DBRX vs Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct
Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.8 to 29.0 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 16 shared benchmarks.
Databricks
Allen Institute for AI (Ai2)Summary
- They share 16 benchmarks with published results for both. DBRX scores higher in 0 categories and Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct leads 35.4 to 14.9.
Side by side
| DBRX | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Databricks | Allen Institute for AI (Ai2) |
| Noometry Index | 29.0 | 38.8 |
| Released | 2024-03-27 | — |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | — | — |
| Max output | — | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Results tracked | 21 | 16 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct leads
DBRX: 32.3 (#262), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 38.9 (#154)
| Benchmark | DBRX | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1132 | 1346 |
| HumanEval+ | 70.1% | — |
| MBPP+ | 55.8% | — |
Reasoning Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct leads
DBRX: 20.5 (#218), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 25.4 (#131)
| Benchmark | DBRX | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1113 | 1322 |
Math Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct leads
DBRX: 22.3 (#265), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 33.6 (#169)
| Benchmark | DBRX | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1145 | 1305 |
| MATH Level 5 | 11.7% | — |
Knowledge Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct leads
DBRX: 14.9 (#289), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 35.4 (#175)
| Benchmark | DBRX | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1076 | 1307 |
| GPQA Diamond | 32.9% | — |
Multilingual Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct leads
DBRX: 29.4 (#263), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 42.8 (#185)
| Benchmark | DBRX | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1071 | 1275 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1068 | 1304 |
| LMArena French | 1095 | 1328 |
| LMArena German | 1057 | 1283 |
| LMArena Korean | 993 | 1206 |
| LMArena Russian | 1078 | 1268 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1064 | 1337 |
| LMArena Japanese | 990 | — |
Instruction Following Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct leads
DBRX: 57.7 (#265), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 68.8 (#182)
| Benchmark | DBRX | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1112 | 1298 |
Long Context Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct leads
DBRX: 33.7 (#253), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 39.9 (#161)
| Benchmark | DBRX | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1112 | 1312 |
Writing & Preference Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct leads
DBRX: 33.7 (#271), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 50.4 (#179)
| Benchmark | DBRX | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1119 | 1311 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1104 | 1264 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1111 | 1309 |
Frequently asked questions
Is DBRX better than Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct?
Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.8 to 29.0 on the Noometry Index.
Is DBRX or Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct better for coding?
Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct scores higher on coding benchmarks: 38.9 versus 32.3 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do DBRX and Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct share?
16 benchmarks have published results for both models. DBRX has 21 scored results on Noometry and Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct has 16.