# Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct vs Qwen2.5-Max

> Qwen2.5-Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.1 to 32.2 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/olmo-2-0325-32b-instruct-vs-qwen2-5-max
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 11

## Summary

- They share 11 benchmarks with published results for both. Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen2.5-Max in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen2.5-Max leads 34.8 to 19.2.
- Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Allen Institute for AI (Ai2) | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 32.2 | 40.1 |
| Rank | 248 | 142 |
| Context | — | — |
| Input $/M | — | — |
| Output $/M | — | — |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |

## Coding

- Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 34.6 (#222)
- Qwen2.5-Max: 41.2 (#118)

| Benchmark | Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1210 | 1359 |
| LiveBench Coding | — | 64.4% |

## Reasoning

- Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 22.6 (#174)
- Qwen2.5-Max: 24.6 (#144)

| Benchmark | Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1208 | 1360 |
| LiveBench Reasoning | — | 51.4% |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | — | 67.9% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 132.54 |
| LiveBench | — | 62.3% |

## Math

- Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 24.8 (#255)
- Qwen2.5-Max: 34.3 (#162)

| Benchmark | Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1208 | 1369 |
| Omni-MATH | 16.1% | — |
| LiveBench Math | — | 58.4% |

## Knowledge

- Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 19.2 (#274)
- Qwen2.5-Max: 34.8 (#181)

| Benchmark | Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| MMLU-Pro | 41.4% | — |
| Confabulations | — | 21.8% |
| GPQA (HELM) | 28.7% | — |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1337 |

## Multilingual

- Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 35.0 (#243)
- Qwen2.5-Max: 48.3 (#140)

| Benchmark | Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1160 | 1352 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1192 | 1382 |
| LMArena Russian | 1187 | 1353 |
| LMArena French | — | 1396 |
| LMArena German | — | 1350 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1299 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1304 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1377 |

## Instruction Following

- Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 61.8 (#238)
- Qwen2.5-Max: 71.5 (#147)

| Benchmark | Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1186 | 1335 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | — | 75.3% |
| IFEval | 78% | — |

## Long Context

- Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 36.2 (#229)
- Qwen2.5-Max: 41.3 (#137)

| Benchmark | Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1194 | 1358 |

## Writing & Preference

- Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 42.3 (#231)
- Qwen2.5-Max: 55.6 (#141)

| Benchmark | Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1218 | 1367 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1199 | 1339 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1221 | 1364 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | — | 72.9% |
| WildBench | 73.4% | — |
| LiveBench Language | — | 56.3% |

## FAQ

### Is Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct better than Qwen2.5-Max?

Qwen2.5-Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.1 to 32.2 on the Noometry Index.

### Is Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct or Qwen2.5-Max better for coding?

Qwen2.5-Max scores higher on coding benchmarks: 41.2 versus 34.6 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct and Qwen2.5-Max share?

11 benchmarks have published results for both models. Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct has 16 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5-Max has 27.