Model comparison
Gemini 2.0 Pro vs Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct
Gemini 2.0 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.1 to 32.7 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.
Google
Allen Institute for AI (Ai2)Summary
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Gemini 2.0 Pro leads 36.5 to 19.5.
- Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Gemini 2.0 Pro | Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Allen Institute for AI (Ai2) | |
| Noometry Index | 39.1 | 32.7 |
| Released | 2025-02-05 | — |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | — | — |
| Max output | — | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Results tracked | 14 | 16 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Gemini 2.0 Pro leads
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 37.8 (#187), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 35.2 (#227)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Aider Polyglot | 35.6% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 63.5% | — |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1210 |
Reasoning Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct leads
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 22.3 (#198), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 23.6 (#175)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| EnigmaEval | 0.7% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 60.1% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1208 |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 68% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 135.06 | — |
| LiveBench | 65.1% | — |
Math Gemini 2.0 Pro leads
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 39.7 (#100), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 26.8 (#255)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Omni-MATH | — | 16.1% |
| LiveBench Math | 71% | — |
| LMArena Math | — | 1208 |
| MATH Level 5 | 83.5% | — |
Knowledge Gemini 2.0 Pro leads
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 36.5 (#167), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 19.5 (#279)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 65.7% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | — | 41.4% |
| Confabulations | 18.4% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | — | 28.7% |
Multilingual Not comparable
Gemini 2.0 Pro: —, Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 34.8 (#248)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1160 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1192 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1187 |
Instruction Following Gemini 2.0 Pro leads
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 75.5 (#59), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 61.5 (#244)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 83.4% | — |
| IFEval | — | 78% |
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1186 |
Long Context Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct leads
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 29.2 (#292), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 36.2 (#234)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | 41.7% | — |
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1194 |
Writing & Preference Gemini 2.0 Pro leads
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 52.7 (#165), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 42.1 (#236)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1218 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1199 |
| WildBench | — | 73.4% |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1221 |
| LiveBench Language | 44.9% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemini 2.0 Pro better than Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct?
Gemini 2.0 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.1 to 32.7 on the Noometry Index.
Is Gemini 2.0 Pro or Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct better for coding?
Gemini 2.0 Pro scores higher on coding benchmarks: 37.8 versus 35.2 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Gemini 2.0 Pro and Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 2.0 Pro has 14 scored results on Noometry and Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct has 16.