Model comparison
Olmo 3 32b Think vs Qwen3.5 27B
Qwen3.5 27B is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.9 to 38.7 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 14 shared benchmarks.
Allen Institute for AI (Ai2)
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 14 benchmarks with published results for both. Olmo 3 32b Think scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3.5 27B in 8 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Qwen3.5 27B leads 59.3 to 49.1.
Side by side
| Olmo 3 32b Think | Qwen3.5 27B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Allen Institute for AI (Ai2) | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 38.7 | 41.9 |
| Released | — | 2026-02-23 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | — | 262K |
| Max output | — | 66K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.30 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $2.40 |
| Results tracked | 14 | 28 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Too close to call
Olmo 3 32b Think: 38.6 (#172), Qwen3.5 27B: 38.9 (#168)
| Benchmark | Olmo 3 32b Think | Qwen3.5 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1319 | 1427 |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1358 |
| WeirdML | — | 39.5% |
| ALE-Bench | — | 349.45 |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Olmo 3 32b Think: —, Qwen3.5 27B: —
| Benchmark | Olmo 3 32b Think | Qwen3.5 27B |
|---|---|---|
| Vending-Bench 2 | — | 201.98 |
Reasoning Qwen3.5 27B leads
Olmo 3 32b Think: 25.9 (#140), Qwen3.5 27B: 27.5 (#117)
| Benchmark | Olmo 3 32b Think | Qwen3.5 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1302 | 1414 |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 47.9% |
| Thematic Generalization | — | 45.5% |
| DTBench | — | 82.4% |
| LMCA | — | 34% |
Math Qwen3.5 27B leads
Olmo 3 32b Think: 36.5 (#165), Qwen3.5 27B: 38.8 (#127)
| Benchmark | Olmo 3 32b Think | Qwen3.5 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1316 | 1429 |
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | — | 56.7% |
Knowledge Qwen3.5 27B leads
Olmo 3 32b Think: 35.0 (#190), Qwen3.5 27B: 38.0 (#150)
| Benchmark | Olmo 3 32b Think | Qwen3.5 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1273 | 1428 |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 12.1% |
Multimodal Not comparable
Olmo 3 32b Think: —, Qwen3.5 27B: 39.4 (#59)
| Benchmark | Olmo 3 32b Think | Qwen3.5 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1241 |
Multilingual Qwen3.5 27B leads
Olmo 3 32b Think: 41.2 (#210), Qwen3.5 27B: 50.8 (#115)
| Benchmark | Olmo 3 32b Think | Qwen3.5 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1255 | 1390 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1300 | 1478 |
| LMArena French | 1291 | 1410 |
| LMArena German | 1290 | 1393 |
| LMArena Russian | 1254 | 1390 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1345 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1358 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1407 |
Instruction Following Qwen3.5 27B leads
Olmo 3 32b Think: 67.2 (#198), Qwen3.5 27B: 73.5 (#119)
| Benchmark | Olmo 3 32b Think | Qwen3.5 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1275 | 1393 |
Long Context Qwen3.5 27B leads
Olmo 3 32b Think: 39.4 (#182), Qwen3.5 27B: 43.1 (#106)
| Benchmark | Olmo 3 32b Think | Qwen3.5 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1296 | 1413 |
Writing & Preference Qwen3.5 27B leads
Olmo 3 32b Think: 49.1 (#193), Qwen3.5 27B: 59.3 (#111)
| Benchmark | Olmo 3 32b Think | Qwen3.5 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1300 | 1409 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1256 | 1362 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1290 | 1410 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Olmo 3 32b Think better than Qwen3.5 27B?
Qwen3.5 27B is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.9 to 38.7 on the Noometry Index.
Is Olmo 3 32b Think or Qwen3.5 27B better for coding?
They score almost the same on coding (38.6 vs 38.9); test both on your own repository before choosing.
How many benchmarks do Olmo 3 32b Think and Qwen3.5 27B share?
14 benchmarks have published results for both models. Olmo 3 32b Think has 14 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.5 27B has 28.