Model comparison

Llama 3.2 3B vs Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct

Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.4 to 28.9 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 13 shared benchmarks.

Llama 3.2 3B Meta

28.9

Rank #321 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 13 benchmarks with published results for both. Llama 3.2 3B scores higher in 0 categories and Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct leads 50.2 to 24.7.

Side by side

Llama 3.2 3B and Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct specifications
Llama 3.2 3BOlmo 3.1 32b Instruct
ProviderMetaAllen Institute for AI (Ai2)
Noometry Index28.939.4
Released2024-09-24—
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window131K—
Max output118K—
Input $ / M tokens$0.05—
Output $ / M tokens$0.33—
Results tracked1816

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

Category by category

Coding Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct leads

Llama 3.2 3B: 27.6 (#319), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 39.5 (#157)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3.2 3BOlmo 3.1 32b Instruct
LMArena Coding10981347
BigCodeBench Instruct23.4%—
BigCodeBench Complete28.3%—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Llama 3.2 3B: 20.1 (#143), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3.2 3BOlmo 3.1 32b Instruct
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard21.9%—
BALROG10.1%—

Reasoning Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct leads

Llama 3.2 3B: 21.0 (#228), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 26.4 (#132)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3.2 3BOlmo 3.1 32b Instruct
LMArena Hard Prompts10951322

Math Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct leads

Llama 3.2 3B: 32.4 (#214), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 36.3 (#167)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3.2 3BOlmo 3.1 32b Instruct
LMArena Math11261305

Knowledge Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct leads

Llama 3.2 3B: 29.7 (#235), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 36.1 (#175)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3.2 3BOlmo 3.1 32b Instruct
LMArena Expert10901308

Multilingual Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct leads

Llama 3.2 3B: 26.2 (#281), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 42.6 (#191)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3.2 3BOlmo 3.1 32b Instruct
LMArena Non-English10191275
LMArena Chinese10171304
LMArena German10561282
LMArena Russian9491268
LMArena French—1328
LMArena Korean—1206
LMArena Spanish—1336

Instruction Following Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct leads

Llama 3.2 3B: 56.0 (#275), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 68.6 (#187)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3.2 3BOlmo 3.1 32b Instruct
LMArena Instruction Following10891299

Long Context Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct leads

Llama 3.2 3B: 33.4 (#261), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 39.9 (#166)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3.2 3BOlmo 3.1 32b Instruct
LMArena Longer Query11001312

Writing & Preference Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct leads

Llama 3.2 3B: 24.7 (#307), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 50.2 (#185)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3.2 3BOlmo 3.1 32b Instruct
LMArena Text11101311
LMArena Creative Writing10941264
LMArena Multi-Turn11051309
EQ-Bench Creative Writing595—

Frequently asked questions

Is Llama 3.2 3B better than Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct?

Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.4 to 28.9 on the Noometry Index.

Is Llama 3.2 3B or Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct better for coding?

Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct scores higher on coding benchmarks: 39.5 versus 27.6 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Llama 3.2 3B and Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct share?

13 benchmarks have published results for both models. Llama 3.2 3B has 18 scored results on Noometry and Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct has 16.

Related comparisons

Go deeper