Model comparison
Olmo 3 32b Think vs Qwen3.5 Plus
Qwen3.5 Plus is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.3 to 38.1 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.
Allen Institute for AI (Ai2)
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- The widest gap is in math, where Qwen3.5 Plus leads 47.9 to 33.8.
- Olmo 3 32b Think has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Olmo 3 32b Think | Qwen3.5 Plus | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Allen Institute for AI (Ai2) | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 38.1 | 42.3 |
| Released | — | 2026-02-16 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | — | 1M |
| Max output | — | 66K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.40 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $2.40 |
| Results tracked | 14 | 15 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Not comparable
Olmo 3 32b Think: 38.0 (#169), Qwen3.5 Plus: —
| Benchmark | Olmo 3 32b Think | Qwen3.5 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1318 | — |
| ALE-Bench | — | 621.92 |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Olmo 3 32b Think: —, Qwen3.5 Plus: —
| Benchmark | Olmo 3 32b Think | Qwen3.5 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| Vending-Bench 2 | — | 0.54 |
Reasoning Qwen3.5 Plus leads
Olmo 3 32b Think: 24.9 (#138), Qwen3.5 Plus: 32.0 (#67)
| Benchmark | Olmo 3 32b Think | Qwen3.5 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| Chess Puzzles | — | 22% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1302 | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 17% |
| DTBench | — | 80.5% |
| LMCA | — | 36.4% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 146.79 |
Math Qwen3.5 Plus leads
Olmo 3 32b Think: 33.8 (#165), Qwen3.5 Plus: 47.9 (#55)
| Benchmark | Olmo 3 32b Think | Qwen3.5 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 86.7% |
| LMArena Math | 1315 | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 21% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | — | 2.1% |
Knowledge Qwen3.5 Plus leads
Olmo 3 32b Think: 34.4 (#189), Qwen3.5 Plus: 46.0 (#78)
| Benchmark | Olmo 3 32b Think | Qwen3.5 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 84.8% |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 25.4% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 10.7% |
| LMArena Expert | 1272 | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
Olmo 3 32b Think: 41.4 (#205), Qwen3.5 Plus: —
| Benchmark | Olmo 3 32b Think | Qwen3.5 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1255 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1300 | — |
| LMArena French | 1291 | — |
| LMArena German | 1290 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1255 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Olmo 3 32b Think: 67.4 (#193), Qwen3.5 Plus: —
| Benchmark | Olmo 3 32b Think | Qwen3.5 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1275 | — |
Long Context Qwen3.5 Plus leads
Olmo 3 32b Think: 39.4 (#177), Qwen3.5 Plus: 42.9 (#109)
| Benchmark | Olmo 3 32b Think | Qwen3.5 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| CL-bench | — | 19.8% |
| CL-bench Life | — | 12.4% |
| LMArena Longer Query | 1296 | — |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Olmo 3 32b Think: 49.2 (#188), Qwen3.5 Plus: —
| Benchmark | Olmo 3 32b Think | Qwen3.5 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1300 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1256 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1289 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Olmo 3 32b Think better than Qwen3.5 Plus?
Qwen3.5 Plus is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.3 to 38.1 on the Noometry Index.
How many benchmarks do Olmo 3 32b Think and Qwen3.5 Plus share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Olmo 3 32b Think has 14 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.5 Plus has 15.