Noometry

Model comparison

Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct vs Qwen3 235B-A22B

Qwen3 235B-A22B is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.5 to 39.4 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 16 shared benchmarks.

Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct Allen Institute for AI (Ai2)

39.4

Rank #168 Confirmed

Qwen3 235B-A22B Alibaba (Qwen)

43.5

Rank #91 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 16 benchmarks with published results for both. Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct scores higher in 1 category and Qwen3 235B-A22B in 7 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where Qwen3 235B-A22B leads 50.4 to 36.3.

Side by side

Olmo 3.1 32b InstructQwen3 235B-A22B
ProviderAllen Institute for AI (Ai2)Alibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index39.443.5
Released—2025-04
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window—131K
Max output—16K
Input $ / M tokens—$0.70
Output $ / M tokens—$2.80
Results tracked1649

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

Category by category

Coding Qwen3 235B-A22B leads

Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 39.5 (#157), Qwen3 235B-A22B: 44.3 (#75)

BenchmarkOlmo 3.1 32b InstructQwen3 235B-A22B
LMArena Coding13471445
Aider Polyglot—59.6%
SciCode—42.4%
WeirdML—41%

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: —, Qwen3 235B-A22B: 33.9 (#51)

BenchmarkOlmo 3.1 32b InstructQwen3 235B-A22B
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard—52.1%
Vending-Bench 2—-11.34

Reasoning Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct leads

Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 26.4 (#132), Qwen3 235B-A22B: 15.7 (#311)

BenchmarkOlmo 3.1 32b InstructQwen3 235B-A22B
LMArena Hard Prompts13221433
ARC-AGI-2—1.3%
SimpleBench—31%
Kagi LLM Benchmark—69.4%
ARC-AGI-1—11%
CritPt—0%
Chess Puzzles—12%
Mystery Game Puzzles—9%
DTBench—80.3%
LMCA—29.3%
Epoch Capabilities Index—143.85
ForecastBench—59.7

Math Qwen3 235B-A22B leads

Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 36.3 (#167), Qwen3 235B-A22B: 50.4 (#57)

BenchmarkOlmo 3.1 32b InstructQwen3 235B-A22B
LMArena Math13051432
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—86.7%
Omni-MATH—71.8%
MATH Level 5—68.9%
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)—8.5%
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)—0%

Knowledge Qwen3 235B-A22B leads

Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 36.1 (#175), Qwen3 235B-A22B: 49.6 (#73)

BenchmarkOlmo 3.1 32b InstructQwen3 235B-A22B
LMArena Expert13081463
GPQA Diamond—80.1%
SimpleQA Verified—40.4%
MMLU-Pro—84.4%
Confabulations—15.6%
Vectara Hallucination Rate—9.3%
GPQA (HELM)—72.7%

Multilingual Qwen3 235B-A22B leads

Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 42.6 (#191), Qwen3 235B-A22B: 52.3 (#89)

BenchmarkOlmo 3.1 32b InstructQwen3 235B-A22B
LMArena Non-English12751409
LMArena Chinese13041481
LMArena French13281445
LMArena German12821433
LMArena Korean12061391
LMArena Russian12681411
LMArena Spanish13361430
LMArena Japanese—1399

Instruction Following Qwen3 235B-A22B leads

Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 68.6 (#187), Qwen3 235B-A22B: 72.6 (#136)

BenchmarkOlmo 3.1 32b InstructQwen3 235B-A22B
LMArena Instruction Following12991408
IFEval—83.5%

Long Context Qwen3 235B-A22B leads

Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 39.9 (#166), Qwen3 235B-A22B: 46.1 (#26)

BenchmarkOlmo 3.1 32b InstructQwen3 235B-A22B
LMArena Longer Query13121426
Fiction.LiveBench—75%

Writing & Preference Qwen3 235B-A22B leads

Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 50.2 (#185), Qwen3 235B-A22B: 59.6 (#108)

BenchmarkOlmo 3.1 32b InstructQwen3 235B-A22B
LMArena Text13111419
LMArena Creative Writing12641384
LMArena Multi-Turn13091432
Short-Story Creative Writing—83%
EQ-Bench Creative Writing—1366
WildBench—86.6%

Frequently asked questions

Is Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct better than Qwen3 235B-A22B?

Qwen3 235B-A22B is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.5 to 39.4 on the Noometry Index.

Is Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct or Qwen3 235B-A22B better for coding?

Qwen3 235B-A22B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 44.3 versus 39.5 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct and Qwen3 235B-A22B share?

16 benchmarks have published results for both models. Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct has 16 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3 235B-A22B has 49.

Related comparisons

Go deeper