Model comparison
Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct vs Qwen1.5-7B
Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.8 to 30.8 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 3.1 32b Instruct scores higher in 8 categories and Qwen1.5-7B in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct leads 50.4 to 29.8.
Side by side
| Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct | Qwen1.5-7B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Allen Institute for AI (Ai2) | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 38.8 | 30.8 |
| Released | — | 2024-02-04 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | — | — |
| Max output | — | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Results tracked | 16 | 13 |
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: 38.9 (#154), Qwen1.5-7B: 31.6 (#271)
| Benchmark | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1346 | 1107 |
Reasoning Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct leads
Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 25.4 (#131), Qwen1.5-7B: 19.5 (#237)
| Benchmark | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1322 | 1066 |
Math Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct leads
Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 33.6 (#169), Qwen1.5-7B: 29.0 (#222)
| Benchmark | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1305 | 1080 |
Knowledge Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct leads
Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 35.4 (#175), Qwen1.5-7B: 28.2 (#239)
| Benchmark | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1307 | 1055 |
| MMLU | — | 62.6% |
Multilingual Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct leads
Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 42.8 (#185), Qwen1.5-7B: 28.6 (#266)
| Benchmark | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1275 | 1058 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1304 | 1140 |
| LMArena Russian | 1268 | 1006 |
| LMArena French | 1328 | — |
| LMArena German | 1283 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1206 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1337 | — |
Instruction Following Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct leads
Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 68.8 (#182), Qwen1.5-7B: 54.4 (#276)
| Benchmark | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1298 | 1058 |
Long Context Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct leads
Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 39.9 (#161), Qwen1.5-7B: 33.1 (#261)
| Benchmark | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1312 | 1090 |
Writing & Preference Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct leads
Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 50.4 (#179), Qwen1.5-7B: 29.8 (#288)
| Benchmark | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1311 | 1084 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1264 | 1035 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1309 | 1061 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct better than Qwen1.5-7B?
Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.8 to 30.8 on the Noometry Index.
Is Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct or Qwen1.5-7B better for coding?
Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct scores higher on coding benchmarks: 38.9 versus 31.6 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct and Qwen1.5-7B share?
12 benchmarks have published results for both models. Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct has 16 scored results on Noometry and Qwen1.5-7B has 13.