Model comparison

Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct vs Qwen2.5 32B Instruct

Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.8 to 29.7 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.

Summary

  • The widest gap is in math, where Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct leads 33.6 to 15.3.

Side by side

Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct and Qwen2.5 32B Instruct specifications
Olmo 3.1 32b InstructQwen2.5 32B Instruct
ProviderAllen Institute for AI (Ai2)Alibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index38.829.7
Released—2024-09
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window—131K
Max output—8K
Input $ / M tokens—$0.70
Output $ / M tokens—$2.80
Results tracked167

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

Category by category

Coding Too close to call

Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 38.9 (#154), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: 38.1 (#165)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkOlmo 3.1 32b InstructQwen2.5 32B Instruct
BigCodeBench Instruct—45%
LMArena Coding1346—
BigCodeBench Complete—52.3%

Reasoning Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct leads

Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 25.4 (#131), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: 18.5 (#262)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkOlmo 3.1 32b InstructQwen2.5 32B Instruct
Chess Puzzles—0%
LMArena Hard Prompts1322—
Epoch Capabilities Index—128.52

Math Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct leads

Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 33.6 (#169), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: 15.3 (#289)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkOlmo 3.1 32b InstructQwen2.5 32B Instruct
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—7.4%
LMArena Math1305—
MATH Level 5—56.1%

Knowledge Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct leads

Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 35.4 (#175), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: 24.9 (#259)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkOlmo 3.1 32b InstructQwen2.5 32B Instruct
GPQA Diamond—46.1%
LMArena Expert1307—

Multilingual Not comparable

Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 42.8 (#185), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: —

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkOlmo 3.1 32b InstructQwen2.5 32B Instruct
LMArena Non-English1275—
LMArena Chinese1304—
LMArena French1328—
LMArena German1283—
LMArena Korean1206—
LMArena Russian1268—
LMArena Spanish1337—

Instruction Following Not comparable

Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 68.8 (#182), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: —

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkOlmo 3.1 32b InstructQwen2.5 32B Instruct
LMArena Instruction Following1298—

Long Context Not comparable

Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 39.9 (#161), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: —

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkOlmo 3.1 32b InstructQwen2.5 32B Instruct
LMArena Longer Query1312—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 50.4 (#179), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: —

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkOlmo 3.1 32b InstructQwen2.5 32B Instruct
LMArena Text1311—
LMArena Creative Writing1264—
LMArena Multi-Turn1309—

Frequently asked questions

Is Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct better than Qwen2.5 32B Instruct?

Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.8 to 29.7 on the Noometry Index.

Is Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct or Qwen2.5 32B Instruct better for coding?

They score almost the same on coding (38.9 vs 38.1); test both on your own repository before choosing.

How many benchmarks do Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct and Qwen2.5 32B Instruct share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct has 16 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5 32B Instruct has 7.

Related comparisons

Go deeper