Model comparison

Gemma 3 12B vs Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct

Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.4 to 32.1 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 12 shared benchmarks.

Gemma 3 12B Google

32.1

Rank #262 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 3 12B scores higher in 3 categories and Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct in 5 categories; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct leads 36.3 to 22.3.

Side by side

Gemma 3 12B and Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct specifications
Gemma 3 12BOlmo 3.1 32b Instruct
ProviderGoogleAllen Institute for AI (Ai2)
Noometry Index32.139.4
Released2025-03-12—
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window131K—
Max output8K—
Input $ / M tokens$0.05—
Output $ / M tokens$0.15—
Results tracked2416

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct leads

Gemma 3 12B: 31.7 (#280), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 39.5 (#157)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 3 12BOlmo 3.1 32b Instruct
LMArena Coding12811347
SciCode17.4%—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Gemma 3 12B: 25.5 (#108), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 3 12BOlmo 3.1 32b Instruct
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard30.4%—

Reasoning Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct leads

Gemma 3 12B: 15.7 (#313), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 26.4 (#132)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 3 12BOlmo 3.1 32b Instruct
LMArena Hard Prompts13091322
CritPt0%—
Chess Puzzles0%—
DTBench48.8%—
LMCA4.5%—
Epoch Capabilities Index123.5—

Math Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct leads

Gemma 3 12B: 22.3 (#279), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 36.3 (#167)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 3 12BOlmo 3.1 32b Instruct
LMArena Math13071305
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202516.7%—

Knowledge Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct leads

Gemma 3 12B: 26.5 (#257), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 36.1 (#175)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 3 12BOlmo 3.1 32b Instruct
LMArena Expert12481308
GPQA Diamond39.5%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate4.4%—

Multimodal Not comparable

Gemma 3 12B: —, Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: —

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 3 12BOlmo 3.1 32b Instruct
MindCube46.7%—

Multilingual Gemma 3 12B leads

Gemma 3 12B: 45.7 (#165), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 42.6 (#191)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 3 12BOlmo 3.1 32b Instruct
LMArena Non-English13181275
LMArena German13701282
LMArena Russian13351268
LMArena Chinese—1304
LMArena French—1328
LMArena Korean—1206
LMArena Spanish—1336

Instruction Following Too close to call

Gemma 3 12B: 68.6 (#186), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 68.6 (#187)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 3 12BOlmo 3.1 32b Instruct
LMArena Instruction Following12991299

Long Context Too close to call

Gemma 3 12B: 40.0 (#162), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 39.9 (#166)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 3 12BOlmo 3.1 32b Instruct
LMArena Longer Query13171312

Writing & Preference Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct leads

Gemma 3 12B: 47.5 (#209), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 50.2 (#185)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 3 12BOlmo 3.1 32b Instruct
LMArena Text13341311
LMArena Creative Writing13311264
LMArena Multi-Turn13341309
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1126—

Frequently asked questions

Is Gemma 3 12B better than Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct?

Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.4 to 32.1 on the Noometry Index.

Is Gemma 3 12B or Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct better for coding?

Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct scores higher on coding benchmarks: 39.5 versus 31.7 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Gemma 3 12B and Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct share?

12 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 3 12B has 24 scored results on Noometry and Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct has 16.

Related comparisons

Go deeper