Model comparison

Olmo 7b Instruct vs Qwen3.8 27B

Qwen3.8 27B is the stronger model overall, scoring 46.0 to 30.3 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 10 shared benchmarks.

Qwen3.8 27B Alibaba (Qwen)

46.0

Rank #68 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 10 benchmarks with published results for both. Olmo 7b Instruct scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3.8 27B in 6 categories; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Qwen3.8 27B leads 65.8 to 25.8.

Side by side

Olmo 7b Instruct and Qwen3.8 27B specifications
Olmo 7b InstructQwen3.8 27B
ProviderAllen Institute for AI (Ai2)Alibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index30.346.0
Released—2026-08-14
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window—262K
Max output—33K
Input $ / M tokens—$0.99
Output $ / M tokens—$1.49
Results tracked1031

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

Category by category

Coding Qwen3.8 27B leads

Olmo 7b Instruct: 29.6 (#303), Qwen3.8 27B: 50.5 (#44)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkOlmo 7b InstructQwen3.8 27B
LMArena Coding10161482
LMArena WebDev—1593
SciCode—46.6%

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Olmo 7b Instruct: —, Qwen3.8 27B: 32.9 (#57)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkOlmo 7b InstructQwen3.8 27B
APEX-Agents—47.5%

Reasoning Qwen3.8 27B leads

Olmo 7b Instruct: 18.8 (#274), Qwen3.8 27B: 41.0 (#54)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkOlmo 7b InstructQwen3.8 27B
LMArena Hard Prompts9931460
ARC-AGI-2—42.4%
NYT Connections (extended)—54.5%
ARC-AGI-1—87.5%
CritPt—5.4%
DTBench—88%
LMCA—41.4%
Surface Evolver Bench—45%
Epoch Capabilities Index—149.38

Math Qwen3.8 27B leads

Olmo 7b Instruct: 30.2 (#237), Qwen3.8 27B: 37.1 (#161)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkOlmo 7b InstructQwen3.8 27B
LMArena Math10181456
ProofBench—16%

Knowledge Not comparable

Olmo 7b Instruct: —, Qwen3.8 27B: 41.6 (#109)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkOlmo 7b InstructQwen3.8 27B
LMArena Expert—1482

Multimodal Not comparable

Olmo 7b Instruct: —, Qwen3.8 27B: 41.3 (#37)

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkOlmo 7b InstructQwen3.8 27B
LMArena Vision—1271

Multilingual Qwen3.8 27B leads

Olmo 7b Instruct: 24.0 (#291), Qwen3.8 27B: 53.7 (#60)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkOlmo 7b InstructQwen3.8 27B
LMArena Non-English9771430
LMArena Chinese10141504
LMArena Russian9471415
LMArena French—1465
LMArena German—1438
LMArena Japanese—1384
LMArena Korean—1393
LMArena Spanish—1448

Instruction Following Qwen3.8 27B leads

Olmo 7b Instruct: 49.0 (#301), Qwen3.8 27B: 75.8 (#53)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkOlmo 7b InstructQwen3.8 27B
LMArena Instruction Following9781439

Long Context Not comparable

Olmo 7b Instruct: —, Qwen3.8 27B: 44.3 (#70)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkOlmo 7b InstructQwen3.8 27B
LMArena Longer Query—1450

Writing & Preference Qwen3.8 27B leads

Olmo 7b Instruct: 25.8 (#303), Qwen3.8 27B: 65.8 (#43)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkOlmo 7b InstructQwen3.8 27B
LMArena Text10321441
LMArena Creative Writing9901384
LMArena Multi-Turn10071441
EQ-Bench Creative Writing—1671

Frequently asked questions

Is Olmo 7b Instruct better than Qwen3.8 27B?

Qwen3.8 27B is the stronger model overall, scoring 46.0 to 30.3 on the Noometry Index.

Is Olmo 7b Instruct or Qwen3.8 27B better for coding?

Qwen3.8 27B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 50.5 versus 29.6 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Olmo 7b Instruct and Qwen3.8 27B share?

10 benchmarks have published results for both models. Olmo 7b Instruct has 10 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.8 27B has 31.

Related comparisons

Go deeper