Model comparison
Olmo 3 32b Think vs Qwen Plus
Olmo 3 32b Think is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.1 to 36.7 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 12 shared benchmarks.
Allen Institute for AI (Ai2)
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. Olmo 3 32b Think scores higher in 2 categories and Qwen Plus in 6 categories; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Olmo 3 32b Think leads 33.8 to 22.0.
- Olmo 3 32b Think has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Olmo 3 32b Think | Qwen Plus | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Allen Institute for AI (Ai2) | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 38.1 | 36.7 |
| Released | — | 2024-01-25 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | — | 1M |
| Max output | — | 33K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.40 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $1.20 |
| Results tracked | 14 | 20 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Too close to call
Olmo 3 32b Think: 38.0 (#169), Qwen Plus: 38.3 (#163)
| Benchmark | Olmo 3 32b Think | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1318 | 1328 |
Reasoning Qwen Plus leads
Olmo 3 32b Think: 24.9 (#138), Qwen Plus: 27.6 (#101)
| Benchmark | Olmo 3 32b Think | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1302 | 1317 |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 63.3% |
| DTBench | — | 81.1% |
| LMCA | — | 24% |
Math Olmo 3 32b Think leads
Olmo 3 32b Think: 33.8 (#165), Qwen Plus: 22.0 (#266)
| Benchmark | Olmo 3 32b Think | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1315 | 1326 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 17.8% |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 65.3% |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 1.7% |
Knowledge Olmo 3 32b Think leads
Olmo 3 32b Think: 34.4 (#189), Qwen Plus: 27.4 (#245)
| Benchmark | Olmo 3 32b Think | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1272 | 1328 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 48.1% |
Multilingual Qwen Plus leads
Olmo 3 32b Think: 41.4 (#205), Qwen Plus: 45.3 (#170)
| Benchmark | Olmo 3 32b Think | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1255 | 1310 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1300 | 1347 |
| LMArena Russian | 1255 | 1323 |
| LMArena French | 1291 | — |
| LMArena German | 1290 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1251 |
Instruction Following Qwen Plus leads
Olmo 3 32b Think: 67.4 (#193), Qwen Plus: 69.0 (#176)
| Benchmark | Olmo 3 32b Think | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1275 | 1303 |
Long Context Too close to call
Olmo 3 32b Think: 39.4 (#177), Qwen Plus: 40.3 (#153)
| Benchmark | Olmo 3 32b Think | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1296 | 1325 |
Writing & Preference Qwen Plus leads
Olmo 3 32b Think: 49.2 (#188), Qwen Plus: 52.4 (#171)
| Benchmark | Olmo 3 32b Think | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1300 | 1326 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1256 | 1293 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1289 | 1336 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Olmo 3 32b Think better than Qwen Plus?
Olmo 3 32b Think is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.1 to 36.7 on the Noometry Index.
Is Olmo 3 32b Think or Qwen Plus better for coding?
They score almost the same on coding (38.0 vs 38.3); test both on your own repository before choosing.
How many benchmarks do Olmo 3 32b Think and Qwen Plus share?
12 benchmarks have published results for both models. Olmo 3 32b Think has 14 scored results on Noometry and Qwen Plus has 20.