| Signal | Olmo 3.1 32B Instruct | Delta | GPT-4 Turbo (older v1106) |
|---|---|---|---|
Capabilities | 50 | -- | |
Benchmarks | 58 | -8 | |
Pricing | 99 | +29 | |
Context window size | 76 | -5 | |
Recency | 100 | +100 | |
Output Capacity | 20 | -40 | |
| Overall Result | 2 wins | of 6 | 3 wins |
Score History
58
current score
GPT-4 Turbo (older v1106)
right now
59.8
current score
Allen AI
OpenAI
Olmo 3.1 32B Instruct saves you $2450.00/month
That's $29400.00/year compared to GPT-4 Turbo (older v1106) at your current usage level of 100K calls/month.
| Metric | Olmo 3.1 32B Instruct | GPT-4 Turbo (older v1106) | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall Score | 58 | 60 | GPT-4 Turbo (older v1106) |
| Rank | #102 | #100 | GPT-4 Turbo (older v1106) |
| Quality Rank | #102 | #100 | GPT-4 Turbo (older v1106) |
| Adoption Rank | #102 | #100 | GPT-4 Turbo (older v1106) |
| Parameters | 32B | -- | -- |
| Context Window | 66K | 128K | GPT-4 Turbo (older v1106) |
| Pricing | $0.20/$0.60/M | $10.00/$30.00/M | -- |
| Signal Scores | |||
| Capabilities | 50 | 50 | Olmo 3.1 32B Instruct |
| Benchmarks | 58 | 66 | GPT-4 Turbo (older v1106) |
| Pricing | 99 | 70 | Olmo 3.1 32B Instruct |
| Context window size | 76 | 81 | GPT-4 Turbo (older v1106) |
| Recency | 100 | 0 | Olmo 3.1 32B Instruct |
| Output Capacity | 20 | 60 | GPT-4 Turbo (older v1106) |
Our score (0-100) is driven by benchmark performance (90%) from Arena Elo ratings, MMLU, GPQA, HumanEval, SWE-bench, and 15+ standardized evaluations. Capabilities and context window serve as tiebreakers (10%). Here's what the scores mean for these two models:
Scores 58/100 (rank #102), placing it in the top 65% of all 290 models tracked.
Scores 60/100 (rank #100), placing it in the top 66% of all 290 models tracked.
With only a 2-point gap, these models are in the same performance tier. The practical difference in output quality is minimal - your choice should depend on pricing, latency requirements, and specific feature needs.
Olmo 3.1 32B Instruct offers 98% better value per quality point. At 1M tokens/day, you'd spend $12.00/month with Olmo 3.1 32B Instruct vs $600.00/month with GPT-4 Turbo (older v1106) - a $588.00 monthly difference.
Both models have comparable response speeds. For most applications, the latency difference is negligible.
When latency matters most: Interactive chatbots, IDE code completion, real-time translation, and user-facing applications where response time directly impacts experience. For batch processing, background summarization, or offline analysis, latency is less critical.
Code generation & review
Higher benchmark score (0/100) indicates stronger performance on coding tasks like generating functions, debugging, and refactoring
Customer support chatbot
Faster response time (speed score 0/100) is critical for user-facing chat. Olmo 3.1 32B Instruct also offers lower per-token costs for high-volume support
Long document analysis
Larger context window (128K tokens) can process longer documents, contracts, and research papers in a single pass
Batch data extraction
Lower output pricing ($0.60/M) reduces costs when processing thousands of records daily
Creative writing & content
Higher overall composite score (60/100) correlates with better nuance, coherence, and style in long-form content
Olmo 3.1 32B Instruct and GPT-4 Turbo (older v1106) are extremely close in overall performance (only 1.7999999999999972 points apart). Your best choice depends entirely on which specific strengths matter most for your use case.
Best for Quality
Olmo 3.1 32B Instruct
Marginally better benchmark scores; both are excellent
Best for Cost
Olmo 3.1 32B Instruct
98% lower pricing; better value at scale
Best for Reliability
Olmo 3.1 32B Instruct
Higher uptime and faster response speeds
Best for Prototyping
Olmo 3.1 32B Instruct
Stronger community support and better developer experience
Best for Production
Olmo 3.1 32B Instruct
Wider enterprise adoption and proven at scale
by Allen AI
| Capability | Olmo 3.1 32B Instruct | GPT-4 Turbo (older v1106) |
|---|---|---|
| Vision (Image Input) | ||
| Function Calling | ||
| Streaming | ||
| JSON Mode | ||
| Reasoning | ||
| Web Search | ||
| Image Output |
Allen AI
OpenAI
Olmo 3.1 32B Instruct saves you $52.92/month
That's 98% cheaper than GPT-4 Turbo (older v1106) at 1,000 tokens/request and 100 requests/day.
Assumes 60% input / 40% output token ratio per request. Actual costs may vary based on your usage pattern.
| Parameter | Olmo 3.1 32B Instruct | GPT-4 Turbo (older v1106) |
|---|---|---|
| Context Window | 66K | 128K |
| Max Output Tokens | -- | 4,096 |
| Open Source | Yes | No |
| Created | Jan 6, 2026 | Nov 6, 2023 |
GPT-4 Turbo (older v1106) scores 60/100 (rank #100) compared to Olmo 3.1 32B Instruct's 58/100 (rank #102), giving it a 2-point advantage. GPT-4 Turbo (older v1106) is the stronger overall choice, though Olmo 3.1 32B Instruct may excel in specific areas like cost efficiency.
Olmo 3.1 32B Instruct is ranked #102 and GPT-4 Turbo (older v1106) is ranked #100 out of 290+ AI models. Rankings use a composite score combining benchmark performance (90%) from MMLU, GPQA, HumanEval, SWE-bench, and 15+ standardized evaluations, with capabilities and context window as tiebreakers (10%). Scores update hourly.
Olmo 3.1 32B Instruct is cheaper at $0.60/M output tokens vs GPT-4 Turbo (older v1106)'s $30.00/M output tokens - 50.0x more expensive. Input token pricing: Olmo 3.1 32B Instruct at $0.20/M vs GPT-4 Turbo (older v1106) at $10.00/M.
GPT-4 Turbo (older v1106) has a larger context window of 128,000 tokens compared to Olmo 3.1 32B Instruct's 65,536 tokens. A larger context window means the model can process longer documents and conversations.