Model comparison
GPT-5.1-Codex vs Olmo 3 32b Think
GPT-5.1-Codex and Olmo 3 32b Think score almost the same on the Noometry Index (38.6 vs 38.7), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.
Allen Institute for AI (Ai2)Summary
- The widest gap is in math, where Olmo 3 32b Think leads 36.5 to 30.3.
- Olmo 3 32b Think has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| GPT-5.1-Codex | Olmo 3 32b Think | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenAI | Allen Institute for AI (Ai2) |
| Noometry Index | 38.6 | 38.7 |
| Released | 2025-11-12 | — |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 400K | — |
| Max output | 128K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $1.25 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $10 | — |
| Results tracked | 6 | 14 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding GPT-5.1-Codex leads
GPT-5.1-Codex: 41.9 (#116), Olmo 3 32b Think: 38.6 (#172)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 66% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1337 | — |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1319 |
| ALE-Bench | 1,245 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
GPT-5.1-Codex: 38.0 (#33), Olmo 3 32b Think: —
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | 60.4% | — |
| METR Time Horizons | 70.8% | — |
Reasoning Not comparable
GPT-5.1-Codex: —, Olmo 3 32b Think: 25.9 (#140)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1302 |
Math Olmo 3 32b Think leads
GPT-5.1-Codex: 30.3 (#235), Olmo 3 32b Think: 36.5 (#165)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| ProofBench | 9% | — |
| LMArena Math | — | 1316 |
Knowledge Not comparable
GPT-5.1-Codex: —, Olmo 3 32b Think: 35.0 (#190)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | — | 1273 |
Multilingual Not comparable
GPT-5.1-Codex: —, Olmo 3 32b Think: 41.2 (#210)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1255 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1300 |
| LMArena French | — | 1291 |
| LMArena German | — | 1290 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1254 |
Instruction Following Not comparable
GPT-5.1-Codex: —, Olmo 3 32b Think: 67.2 (#198)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1275 |
Long Context Not comparable
GPT-5.1-Codex: —, Olmo 3 32b Think: 39.4 (#182)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1296 |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
GPT-5.1-Codex: —, Olmo 3 32b Think: 49.1 (#193)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1300 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1256 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1290 |
Frequently asked questions
Is GPT-5.1-Codex better than Olmo 3 32b Think?
GPT-5.1-Codex and Olmo 3 32b Think score almost the same on the Noometry Index (38.6 vs 38.7), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Is GPT-5.1-Codex or Olmo 3 32b Think better for coding?
GPT-5.1-Codex scores higher on coding benchmarks: 41.9 versus 38.6 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do GPT-5.1-Codex and Olmo 3 32b Think share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. GPT-5.1-Codex has 6 scored results on Noometry and Olmo 3 32b Think has 14.