Noometry

Model comparison

Grok 4.5 vs Olmo 3.1 32b Think

Grok 4.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 55.0 to 37.9 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 15 shared benchmarks.

Grok 4.5 xAI

55.0

Rank #25 Confirmed

Olmo 3.1 32b Think Allen Institute for AI (Ai2)

37.9

Rank #191 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 15 benchmarks with published results for both. Grok 4.5 scores higher in 8 categories and Olmo 3.1 32b Think in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where Grok 4.5 leads 56.1 to 25.2.
  • Olmo 3.1 32b Think has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Grok 4.5Olmo 3.1 32b Think
ProviderxAIAllen Institute for AI (Ai2)
Noometry Index55.037.9
Released2026-07-08—
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window500K—
Max output500K—
Input $ / M tokens$2—
Output $ / M tokens$6—
Results tracked5215

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

Category by category

Coding Grok 4.5 leads

Grok 4.5: 52.2 (#35), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 37.7 (#189)

BenchmarkGrok 4.5Olmo 3.1 32b Think
LMArena Coding14741291
DeepSWE53.8%—
FrontierCode42.4%—
LMArena WebDev1553—
SciCode54.1%—
WeirdML46.4%—
ALE-Bench1,309—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Grok 4.5: 44.4 (#17), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: —

BenchmarkGrok 4.5Olmo 3.1 32b Think
APEX-Agents56.2%—
τ²-bench Banking47.9%—
PostTrainBench23.4%—
GBAEval65.4%—
GDP.pdf14%—
LMArena Search1213—
Vending-Bench 23,887—

Reasoning Grok 4.5 leads

Grok 4.5: 56.1 (#25), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 25.2 (#150)

BenchmarkGrok 4.5Olmo 3.1 32b Think
LMArena Hard Prompts14621272
ARC-AGI-252.6%—
SimpleBench70%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark83.5%—
NYT Connections (extended)79.9%—
ARC-AGI-187.2%—
CritPt15.4%—
Chess Puzzles36%—
DTBench96.5%—
LMCA45.2%—
Surface Evolver Bench74.4%—
Epoch Capabilities Index153.92—

Math Grok 4.5 leads

Grok 4.5: 60.9 (#35), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 36.3 (#168)

BenchmarkGrok 4.5Olmo 3.1 32b Think
LMArena Math14591305
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)57.2%—
FrontierMath Tier 424.4%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202597.8%—
ProofBench31%—

Knowledge Grok 4.5 leads

Grok 4.5: 62.3 (#24), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 35.7 (#181)

BenchmarkGrok 4.5Olmo 3.1 32b Think
LMArena Expert14661295
GPQA Diamond93.4%—
SimpleQA Verified48.3%—

Multimodal Not comparable

Grok 4.5: 37.6 (#72), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: —

BenchmarkGrok 4.5Olmo 3.1 32b Think
LMArena Vision1288—
Blueprint-Bench 227.3%—
Furniture Assembly22.5%—
LMArena Document1452—

Multilingual Grok 4.5 leads

Grok 4.5: 54.4 (#42), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 38.1 (#231)

BenchmarkGrok 4.5Olmo 3.1 32b Think
LMArena Non-English14401209
LMArena Chinese14961242
LMArena French14561260
LMArena German14461262
LMArena Russian14481193
LMArena Spanish14501289
LMArena Japanese1428—
LMArena Korean1404—

Instruction Following Grok 4.5 leads

Grok 4.5: 76.0 (#48), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 65.6 (#218)

BenchmarkGrok 4.5Olmo 3.1 32b Think
LMArena Instruction Following14461247

Long Context Grok 4.5 leads

Grok 4.5: 44.8 (#56), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 38.6 (#195)

BenchmarkGrok 4.5Olmo 3.1 32b Think
LMArena Longer Query14631272

Writing & Preference Grok 4.5 leads

Grok 4.5: 65.8 (#42), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 46.2 (#220)

BenchmarkGrok 4.5Olmo 3.1 32b Think
LMArena Text14481272
LMArena Creative Writing14421226
LMArena Multi-Turn14561252
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1579—

Frequently asked questions

Is Grok 4.5 better than Olmo 3.1 32b Think?

Grok 4.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 55.0 to 37.9 on the Noometry Index.

Is Grok 4.5 or Olmo 3.1 32b Think better for coding?

Grok 4.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 52.2 versus 37.7 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Grok 4.5 and Olmo 3.1 32b Think share?

15 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok 4.5 has 52 scored results on Noometry and Olmo 3.1 32b Think has 15.

Related comparisons

Go deeper