Model comparison
Olmo 3.1 32b Think vs Qwen3.5 Max Preview
Qwen3.5 Max Preview is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.3 to 37.9 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 15 shared benchmarks.
Allen Institute for AI (Ai2)
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 15 benchmarks with published results for both. Olmo 3.1 32b Think scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3.5 Max Preview in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Qwen3.5 Max Preview leads 66.0 to 46.2.
- Olmo 3.1 32b Think has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Olmo 3.1 32b Think | Qwen3.5 Max Preview | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Allen Institute for AI (Ai2) | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 37.9 | 45.3 |
| Released | — | — |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | — | — |
| Max output | — | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Results tracked | 15 | 17 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Qwen3.5 Max Preview leads
Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 37.7 (#189), Qwen3.5 Max Preview: 44.0 (#77)
| Benchmark | Olmo 3.1 32b Think | Qwen3.5 Max Preview |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1291 | 1487 |
Reasoning Qwen3.5 Max Preview leads
Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 25.2 (#150), Qwen3.5 Max Preview: 30.8 (#84)
| Benchmark | Olmo 3.1 32b Think | Qwen3.5 Max Preview |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1272 | 1483 |
Math Qwen3.5 Max Preview leads
Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 36.3 (#168), Qwen3.5 Max Preview: 40.1 (#94)
| Benchmark | Olmo 3.1 32b Think | Qwen3.5 Max Preview |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1305 | 1474 |
Knowledge Qwen3.5 Max Preview leads
Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 35.7 (#181), Qwen3.5 Max Preview: 41.8 (#107)
| Benchmark | Olmo 3.1 32b Think | Qwen3.5 Max Preview |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1295 | 1489 |
Multilingual Qwen3.5 Max Preview leads
Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 38.1 (#231), Qwen3.5 Max Preview: 56.2 (#22)
| Benchmark | Olmo 3.1 32b Think | Qwen3.5 Max Preview |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1209 | 1465 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1242 | 1534 |
| LMArena French | 1260 | 1484 |
| LMArena German | 1262 | 1487 |
| LMArena Russian | 1193 | 1471 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1289 | 1470 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1495 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1438 |
Instruction Following Qwen3.5 Max Preview leads
Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 65.6 (#218), Qwen3.5 Max Preview: 77.0 (#31)
| Benchmark | Olmo 3.1 32b Think | Qwen3.5 Max Preview |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1247 | 1467 |
Long Context Qwen3.5 Max Preview leads
Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 38.6 (#195), Qwen3.5 Max Preview: 45.2 (#45)
| Benchmark | Olmo 3.1 32b Think | Qwen3.5 Max Preview |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1272 | 1476 |
Writing & Preference Qwen3.5 Max Preview leads
Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 46.2 (#220), Qwen3.5 Max Preview: 66.0 (#41)
| Benchmark | Olmo 3.1 32b Think | Qwen3.5 Max Preview |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1272 | 1470 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1226 | 1464 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1252 | 1478 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Olmo 3.1 32b Think better than Qwen3.5 Max Preview?
Qwen3.5 Max Preview is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.3 to 37.9 on the Noometry Index.
Is Olmo 3.1 32b Think or Qwen3.5 Max Preview better for coding?
Qwen3.5 Max Preview scores higher on coding benchmarks: 44.0 versus 37.7 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Olmo 3.1 32b Think and Qwen3.5 Max Preview share?
15 benchmarks have published results for both models. Olmo 3.1 32b Think has 15 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.5 Max Preview has 17.