Model comparison

Olmo 7b Instruct vs Qwen3.5-Flash

Qwen3.5-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.5 to 30.3 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 10 shared benchmarks.

Qwen3.5-Flash Alibaba (Qwen)

42.5

Rank #112 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 10 benchmarks with published results for both. Olmo 7b Instruct scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3.5-Flash in 6 categories; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Qwen3.5-Flash leads 57.9 to 25.8.
  • Olmo 7b Instruct has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Olmo 7b Instruct and Qwen3.5-Flash specifications
Olmo 7b InstructQwen3.5-Flash
ProviderAllen Institute for AI (Ai2)Alibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index30.342.5
Released—2026-02-23
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window—1M
Max output—66K
Input $ / M tokens—$0.10
Output $ / M tokens—$0.40
Results tracked1032

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

Category by category

Coding Qwen3.5-Flash leads

Olmo 7b Instruct: 29.6 (#303), Qwen3.5-Flash: 34.2 (#242)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkOlmo 7b InstructQwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Coding10161412
LMArena WebDev—1244
ALE-Bench—221.8

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Olmo 7b Instruct: —, Qwen3.5-Flash: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkOlmo 7b InstructQwen3.5-Flash
Vending-Bench 2—462.69

Reasoning Qwen3.5-Flash leads

Olmo 7b Instruct: 18.8 (#274), Qwen3.5-Flash: 33.7 (#72)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkOlmo 7b InstructQwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Hard Prompts9931403
Chess Puzzles—21%
Mystery Game Puzzles—20%
DTBench—82.9%
LMCA—29.1%
Epoch Capabilities Index—143.98

Math Qwen3.5-Flash leads

Olmo 7b Instruct: 30.2 (#237), Qwen3.5-Flash: 37.4 (#158)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkOlmo 7b InstructQwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Math10181407
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)—18.2%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—84.4%
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)—6.2%
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)—0%

Knowledge Not comparable

Olmo 7b Instruct: —, Qwen3.5-Flash: 43.2 (#93)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkOlmo 7b InstructQwen3.5-Flash
GPQA Diamond—82.3%
SimpleQA Verified—20.3%
Vectara Hallucination Rate—10.5%
LMArena Expert—1407

Multilingual Qwen3.5-Flash leads

Olmo 7b Instruct: 24.0 (#291), Qwen3.5-Flash: 50.5 (#121)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkOlmo 7b InstructQwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Non-English9771385
LMArena Chinese10141446
LMArena Russian9471379
LMArena French—1412
LMArena German—1390
LMArena Japanese—1368
LMArena Korean—1344
LMArena Spanish—1400

Instruction Following Qwen3.5-Flash leads

Olmo 7b Instruct: 49.0 (#301), Qwen3.5-Flash: 72.6 (#139)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkOlmo 7b InstructQwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Instruction Following9781374

Long Context Not comparable

Olmo 7b Instruct: —, Qwen3.5-Flash: 42.4 (#124)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkOlmo 7b InstructQwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Longer Query—1392

Writing & Preference Qwen3.5-Flash leads

Olmo 7b Instruct: 25.8 (#303), Qwen3.5-Flash: 57.9 (#122)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkOlmo 7b InstructQwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Text10321397
LMArena Creative Writing9901343
LMArena Multi-Turn10071393

Frequently asked questions

Is Olmo 7b Instruct better than Qwen3.5-Flash?

Qwen3.5-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.5 to 30.3 on the Noometry Index.

Is Olmo 7b Instruct or Qwen3.5-Flash better for coding?

Qwen3.5-Flash scores higher on coding benchmarks: 34.2 versus 29.6 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Olmo 7b Instruct and Qwen3.5-Flash share?

10 benchmarks have published results for both models. Olmo 7b Instruct has 10 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.5-Flash has 32.

Related comparisons

Go deeper