Model comparison
Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct vs Qwen3 32B
Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct and Qwen3 32B score almost the same on the Noometry Index (39.4 vs 39.2), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Last verified . 13 shared benchmarks.
Allen Institute for AI (Ai2)
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 13 benchmarks with published results for both. Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct scores higher in 2 categories and Qwen3 32B in 6 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct leads 26.4 to 20.2.
Side by side
| Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct | Qwen3 32B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Allen Institute for AI (Ai2) | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 39.4 | 39.2 |
| Released | — | 2025-04 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | — | 131K |
| Max output | — | 16K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.70 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $2.80 |
| Results tracked | 16 | 26 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct leads
Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 39.5 (#157), Qwen3 32B: 37.7 (#190)
| Benchmark | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1347 | 1358 |
| Aider Polyglot | — | 40% |
| SciCode | — | 35.4% |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: —, Qwen3 32B: 32.6 (#62)
| Benchmark | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 48.7% |
Reasoning Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct leads
Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 26.4 (#132), Qwen3 32B: 20.2 (#241)
| Benchmark | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1322 | 1334 |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 54.9% |
| CritPt | — | 0.3% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 5% |
| DTBench | — | 67.5% |
| LMCA | — | 17.3% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 138.51 |
Math Qwen3 32B leads
Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 36.3 (#167), Qwen3 32B: 39.7 (#99)
| Benchmark | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1305 | 1399 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 66.9% |
Knowledge Qwen3 32B leads
Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 36.1 (#175), Qwen3 32B: 40.0 (#125)
| Benchmark | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1308 | 1362 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 65.7% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 5.9% |
Multilingual Qwen3 32B leads
Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 42.6 (#191), Qwen3 32B: 45.6 (#167)
| Benchmark | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1275 | 1317 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1304 | 1357 |
| LMArena German | 1282 | 1341 |
| LMArena Russian | 1268 | 1311 |
| LMArena French | 1328 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1206 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1336 | — |
Instruction Following Too close to call
Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 68.6 (#187), Qwen3 32B: 68.9 (#179)
| Benchmark | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1299 | 1305 |
Long Context Qwen3 32B leads
Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 39.9 (#166), Qwen3 32B: 43.8 (#87)
| Benchmark | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1312 | 1327 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 74.2% |
Writing & Preference Qwen3 32B leads
Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 50.2 (#185), Qwen3 32B: 52.9 (#163)
| Benchmark | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1311 | 1340 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1264 | 1297 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1309 | 1331 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct better than Qwen3 32B?
Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct and Qwen3 32B score almost the same on the Noometry Index (39.4 vs 39.2), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Is Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct or Qwen3 32B better for coding?
Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct scores higher on coding benchmarks: 39.5 versus 37.7 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct and Qwen3 32B share?
13 benchmarks have published results for both models. Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct has 16 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3 32B has 26.