Noometry

Model comparison

Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct vs Qwen3.5-Flash

Qwen3.5-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.5 to 32.7 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 11 shared benchmarks.

Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct Allen Institute for AI (Ai2)

32.7

Rank #254 Confirmed

Qwen3.5-Flash Alibaba (Qwen)

42.5

Rank #112 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 11 benchmarks with published results for both. Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct scores higher in 1 category and Qwen3.5-Flash in 7 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen3.5-Flash leads 43.2 to 19.5.
  • Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Olmo 2 0325 32b InstructQwen3.5-Flash
ProviderAllen Institute for AI (Ai2)Alibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index32.742.5
Released—2026-02-23
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window—1M
Max output—66K
Input $ / M tokens—$0.10
Output $ / M tokens—$0.40
Results tracked1632

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

Category by category

Coding Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct leads

Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 35.2 (#227), Qwen3.5-Flash: 34.2 (#242)

BenchmarkOlmo 2 0325 32b InstructQwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Coding12101412
LMArena WebDev—1244
ALE-Bench—221.8

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: —, Qwen3.5-Flash: —

BenchmarkOlmo 2 0325 32b InstructQwen3.5-Flash
Vending-Bench 2—462.69

Reasoning Qwen3.5-Flash leads

Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 23.6 (#175), Qwen3.5-Flash: 33.7 (#72)

BenchmarkOlmo 2 0325 32b InstructQwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Hard Prompts12081403
Chess Puzzles—21%
Mystery Game Puzzles—20%
DTBench—82.9%
LMCA—29.1%
Epoch Capabilities Index—143.98

Math Qwen3.5-Flash leads

Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 26.8 (#255), Qwen3.5-Flash: 37.4 (#158)

BenchmarkOlmo 2 0325 32b InstructQwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Math12081407
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)—18.2%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—84.4%
Omni-MATH16.1%—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)—6.2%
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)—0%

Knowledge Qwen3.5-Flash leads

Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 19.5 (#279), Qwen3.5-Flash: 43.2 (#93)

BenchmarkOlmo 2 0325 32b InstructQwen3.5-Flash
GPQA Diamond—82.3%
SimpleQA Verified—20.3%
MMLU-Pro41.4%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate—10.5%
GPQA (HELM)28.7%—
LMArena Expert—1407

Multilingual Qwen3.5-Flash leads

Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 34.8 (#248), Qwen3.5-Flash: 50.5 (#121)

BenchmarkOlmo 2 0325 32b InstructQwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Non-English11601385
LMArena Chinese11921446
LMArena Russian11871379
LMArena French—1412
LMArena German—1390
LMArena Japanese—1368
LMArena Korean—1344
LMArena Spanish—1400

Instruction Following Qwen3.5-Flash leads

Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 61.5 (#244), Qwen3.5-Flash: 72.6 (#139)

BenchmarkOlmo 2 0325 32b InstructQwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Instruction Following11861374
IFEval78%—

Long Context Qwen3.5-Flash leads

Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 36.2 (#234), Qwen3.5-Flash: 42.4 (#124)

BenchmarkOlmo 2 0325 32b InstructQwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Longer Query11941392

Writing & Preference Qwen3.5-Flash leads

Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 42.1 (#236), Qwen3.5-Flash: 57.9 (#122)

BenchmarkOlmo 2 0325 32b InstructQwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Text12181397
LMArena Creative Writing11991343
LMArena Multi-Turn12211393
WildBench73.4%—

Frequently asked questions

Is Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct better than Qwen3.5-Flash?

Qwen3.5-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.5 to 32.7 on the Noometry Index.

Is Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct or Qwen3.5-Flash better for coding?

Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct scores higher on coding benchmarks: 35.2 versus 34.2 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct and Qwen3.5-Flash share?

11 benchmarks have published results for both models. Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct has 16 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.5-Flash has 32.

Related comparisons

Go deeper