Model comparison
Olmo 3 32b Think vs Qwen3 32B
Olmo 3 32b Think and Qwen3 32B score almost the same on the Noometry Index (38.1 vs 38.8), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Last verified . 13 shared benchmarks.
Allen Institute for AI (Ai2)
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 13 benchmarks with published results for both. Olmo 3 32b Think scores higher in 2 categories and Qwen3 32B in 6 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen3 32B leads 40.0 to 34.4.
Side by side
| Olmo 3 32b Think | Qwen3 32B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Allen Institute for AI (Ai2) | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 38.1 | 38.8 |
| Released | — | 2025-04 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | — | 131K |
| Max output | — | 16K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.70 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $2.80 |
| Results tracked | 14 | 26 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Too close to call
Olmo 3 32b Think: 38.0 (#169), Qwen3 32B: 37.3 (#184)
| Benchmark | Olmo 3 32b Think | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1318 | 1358 |
| Aider Polyglot | — | 40% |
| SciCode | — | 35.4% |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Olmo 3 32b Think: —, Qwen3 32B: 32.3 (#58)
| Benchmark | Olmo 3 32b Think | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 48.7% |
Reasoning Olmo 3 32b Think leads
Olmo 3 32b Think: 24.9 (#138), Qwen3 32B: 19.6 (#233)
| Benchmark | Olmo 3 32b Think | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1302 | 1335 |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 54.9% |
| CritPt | — | 0.3% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 5% |
| DTBench | — | 67.5% |
| LMCA | — | 17.3% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 138.51 |
Math Qwen3 32B leads
Olmo 3 32b Think: 33.8 (#165), Qwen3 32B: 37.9 (#89)
| Benchmark | Olmo 3 32b Think | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1315 | 1399 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 66.9% |
Knowledge Qwen3 32B leads
Olmo 3 32b Think: 34.4 (#189), Qwen3 32B: 40.0 (#112)
| Benchmark | Olmo 3 32b Think | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1272 | 1362 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 65.7% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 5.9% |
Multilingual Qwen3 32B leads
Olmo 3 32b Think: 41.4 (#205), Qwen3 32B: 45.8 (#162)
| Benchmark | Olmo 3 32b Think | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1255 | 1317 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1300 | 1357 |
| LMArena German | 1290 | 1341 |
| LMArena Russian | 1255 | 1311 |
| LMArena French | 1291 | — |
Instruction Following Qwen3 32B leads
Olmo 3 32b Think: 67.4 (#193), Qwen3 32B: 69.1 (#174)
| Benchmark | Olmo 3 32b Think | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1275 | 1305 |
Long Context Qwen3 32B leads
Olmo 3 32b Think: 39.4 (#177), Qwen3 32B: 43.7 (#83)
| Benchmark | Olmo 3 32b Think | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1296 | 1327 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 74.2% |
Writing & Preference Qwen3 32B leads
Olmo 3 32b Think: 49.2 (#188), Qwen3 32B: 53.1 (#158)
| Benchmark | Olmo 3 32b Think | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1300 | 1340 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1256 | 1297 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1289 | 1331 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Olmo 3 32b Think better than Qwen3 32B?
Olmo 3 32b Think and Qwen3 32B score almost the same on the Noometry Index (38.1 vs 38.8), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Is Olmo 3 32b Think or Qwen3 32B better for coding?
They score almost the same on coding (38.0 vs 37.3); test both on your own repository before choosing.
How many benchmarks do Olmo 3 32b Think and Qwen3 32B share?
13 benchmarks have published results for both models. Olmo 3 32b Think has 14 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3 32B has 26.