Model comparison
OLMo 2 Furious 13B vs Qwen3 32B
Qwen3 32B is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.2 to 29.7 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.
Allen Institute for AI (Ai2)
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen3 32B leads 40.0 to 18.3.
Side by side
| OLMo 2 Furious 13B | Qwen3 32B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Allen Institute for AI (Ai2) | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 29.7 | 39.2 |
| Released | 2024-12-31 | 2025-04 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | — | 131K |
| Max output | — | 16K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.70 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $2.80 |
| Results tracked | 12 | 26 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Qwen3 32B leads
OLMo 2 Furious 13B: 28.6 (#313), Qwen3 32B: 37.7 (#190)
| Benchmark | OLMo 2 Furious 13B | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| Aider Polyglot | — | 40% |
| SciCode | — | 35.4% |
| LiveBench Coding | 10.4% | — |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1358 |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
OLMo 2 Furious 13B: —, Qwen3 32B: 32.6 (#62)
| Benchmark | OLMo 2 Furious 13B | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 48.7% |
Reasoning Qwen3 32B leads
OLMo 2 Furious 13B: 15.5 (#314), Qwen3 32B: 20.2 (#241)
| Benchmark | OLMo 2 Furious 13B | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 54.9% |
| CritPt | — | 0.3% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 5% |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 16.3% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1334 |
| DTBench | — | 67.5% |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 20.6% | — |
| LMCA | — | 17.3% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 138.51 |
| LiveBench | 22.1% | — |
Math Qwen3 32B leads
OLMo 2 Furious 13B: 23.1 (#273), Qwen3 32B: 39.7 (#99)
| Benchmark | OLMo 2 Furious 13B | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 66.9% |
| Omni-MATH | 15.6% | — |
| LiveBench Math | 13.6% | — |
| LMArena Math | — | 1399 |
Knowledge Qwen3 32B leads
OLMo 2 Furious 13B: 18.3 (#283), Qwen3 32B: 40.0 (#125)
| Benchmark | OLMo 2 Furious 13B | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 65.7% |
| MMLU-Pro | 31% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 5.9% |
| GPQA (HELM) | 31.6% | — |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1362 |
Multilingual Not comparable
OLMo 2 Furious 13B: —, Qwen3 32B: 45.6 (#167)
| Benchmark | OLMo 2 Furious 13B | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1317 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1357 |
| LMArena German | — | 1341 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1311 |
Instruction Following Qwen3 32B leads
OLMo 2 Furious 13B: 60.9 (#248), Qwen3 32B: 68.9 (#179)
| Benchmark | OLMo 2 Furious 13B | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 60.6% | — |
| IFEval | 73% | — |
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1305 |
Long Context Not comparable
OLMo 2 Furious 13B: —, Qwen3 32B: 43.8 (#87)
| Benchmark | OLMo 2 Furious 13B | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 74.2% |
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1327 |
Writing & Preference Qwen3 32B leads
OLMo 2 Furious 13B: 42.9 (#230), Qwen3 32B: 52.9 (#163)
| Benchmark | OLMo 2 Furious 13B | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1340 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1297 |
| WildBench | 68.9% | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1331 |
| LiveBench Language | 11.2% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is OLMo 2 Furious 13B better than Qwen3 32B?
Qwen3 32B is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.2 to 29.7 on the Noometry Index.
Is OLMo 2 Furious 13B or Qwen3 32B better for coding?
Qwen3 32B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 37.7 versus 28.6 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do OLMo 2 Furious 13B and Qwen3 32B share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. OLMo 2 Furious 13B has 12 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3 32B has 26.