Model comparison
Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct vs Qwen2.5 7B Instruct
Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.8 to 28.6 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.
Allen Institute for AI (Ai2)
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- The widest gap is in math, where Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct leads 33.6 to 11.8.
Side by side
| Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Allen Institute for AI (Ai2) | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 38.8 | 28.6 |
| Released | — | 2024-09 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | — | 131K |
| Max output | — | 8K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.17 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $0.70 |
| Results tracked | 16 | 15 |
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), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 35.9 (#204)
| Benchmark | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 37.6% |
| LMArena Coding | 1346 | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 46.1% |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: —, Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 23.5 (#117)
| Benchmark | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| BALROG | — | 7.8% |
Reasoning Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct leads
Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 25.4 (#131), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 14.3 (#317)
| Benchmark | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Chess Puzzles | — | 0% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1322 | — |
| DTBench | — | 47.7% |
| LMCA | — | 6.4% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 118.44 |
Math Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct leads
Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 33.6 (#169), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 11.8 (#300)
| Benchmark | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 2.5% |
| Omni-MATH | — | 29.4% |
| LMArena Math | 1305 | — |
Knowledge Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct leads
Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 35.4 (#175), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 17.0 (#281)
| Benchmark | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 35.5% |
| MMLU-Pro | — | 53.9% |
| GPQA (HELM) | — | 34.1% |
| LMArena Expert | 1307 | — |
| MMLU | — | 72.9% |
Multilingual Not comparable
Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 42.8 (#185), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1275 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1304 | — |
| LMArena French | 1328 | — |
| LMArena German | 1283 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1206 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1268 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1337 | — |
Instruction Following Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct leads
Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 68.8 (#182), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 63.4 (#226)
| Benchmark | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| IFEval | — | 74.1% |
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1298 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 39.9 (#161), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1312 | — |
Writing & Preference Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct leads
Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 50.4 (#179), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 48.8 (#194)
| Benchmark | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1311 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1264 | — |
| WildBench | — | 73.1% |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1309 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct better than Qwen2.5 7B Instruct?
Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.8 to 28.6 on the Noometry Index.
Is Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct or Qwen2.5 7B Instruct better for coding?
Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct scores higher on coding benchmarks: 38.9 versus 35.9 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct has 16 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct has 15.