Model comparison
Gemini 2.0 Pro vs Olmo 3.1 32b Think
Gemini 2.0 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.1 to 37.9 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.
Google
Allen Institute for AI (Ai2)Summary
- The widest gap is in instruction following, where Gemini 2.0 Pro leads 75.5 to 65.6.
- Olmo 3.1 32b Think has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Gemini 2.0 Pro | Olmo 3.1 32b Think | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Allen Institute for AI (Ai2) | |
| Noometry Index | 39.1 | 37.9 |
| Released | 2025-02-05 | — |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | — | — |
| Max output | — | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Results tracked | 14 | 15 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Too close to call
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 37.8 (#187), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 37.7 (#189)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| Aider Polyglot | 35.6% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 63.5% | — |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1291 |
Reasoning Olmo 3.1 32b Think leads
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 22.3 (#198), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 25.2 (#150)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| EnigmaEval | 0.7% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 60.1% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1272 |
| 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 3.1 32b Think: 36.3 (#168)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Math | 71% | — |
| LMArena Math | — | 1305 |
| MATH Level 5 | 83.5% | — |
Knowledge Too close to call
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 36.5 (#167), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 35.7 (#181)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 65.7% | — |
| Confabulations | 18.4% | — |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1295 |
Multilingual Not comparable
Gemini 2.0 Pro: —, Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 38.1 (#231)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1209 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1242 |
| LMArena French | — | 1260 |
| LMArena German | — | 1262 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1193 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1289 |
Instruction Following Gemini 2.0 Pro leads
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 75.5 (#59), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 65.6 (#218)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 83.4% | — |
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1247 |
Long Context Olmo 3.1 32b Think leads
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 29.2 (#292), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 38.6 (#195)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | 41.7% | — |
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1272 |
Writing & Preference Gemini 2.0 Pro leads
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 52.7 (#165), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 46.2 (#220)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1272 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1226 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1252 |
| LiveBench Language | 44.9% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemini 2.0 Pro better than Olmo 3.1 32b Think?
Gemini 2.0 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.1 to 37.9 on the Noometry Index.
Is Gemini 2.0 Pro or Olmo 3.1 32b Think better for coding?
They score almost the same on coding (37.8 vs 37.7); test both on your own repository before choosing.
How many benchmarks do Gemini 2.0 Pro and Olmo 3.1 32b Think share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 2.0 Pro has 14 scored results on Noometry and Olmo 3.1 32b Think has 15.