# Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct vs Qwen Plus

> Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.8 to 36.7 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/olmo-3-1-32b-instruct-vs-qwen-plus
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 12

## Summary

- They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct scores higher in 3 categories and Qwen Plus in 5 categories; 5 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct leads 33.6 to 22.0.
- Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Allen Institute for AI (Ai2) | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 38.8 | 36.7 |
| Rank | 168 | 204 |
| Context | — | 1M |
| Input $/M | — | $0.40 |
| Output $/M | — | $1.20 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |

## Coding

- Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 38.9 (#154)
- Qwen Plus: 38.3 (#163)

| Benchmark | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1346 | 1328 |

## Reasoning

- Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 25.4 (#131)
- Qwen Plus: 27.6 (#101)

| Benchmark | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1322 | 1317 |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 63.3% |
| DTBench | — | 81.1% |
| LMCA | — | 24% |

## Math

- Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 33.6 (#169)
- Qwen Plus: 22.0 (#266)

| Benchmark | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1305 | 1326 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 17.8% |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 65.3% |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 1.7% |

## Knowledge

- Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 35.4 (#175)
- Qwen Plus: 27.4 (#245)

| Benchmark | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1307 | 1328 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 48.1% |

## Multilingual

- Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 42.8 (#185)
- Qwen Plus: 45.3 (#170)

| Benchmark | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1275 | 1310 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1304 | 1347 |
| LMArena Russian | 1268 | 1323 |
| LMArena French | 1328 | — |
| LMArena German | 1283 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1251 |
| LMArena Korean | 1206 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1337 | — |

## Instruction Following

- Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 68.8 (#182)
- Qwen Plus: 69.0 (#176)

| Benchmark | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1298 | 1303 |

## Long Context

- Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 39.9 (#161)
- Qwen Plus: 40.3 (#153)

| Benchmark | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1312 | 1325 |

## Writing & Preference

- Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 50.4 (#179)
- Qwen Plus: 52.4 (#171)

| Benchmark | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1311 | 1326 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1264 | 1293 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1309 | 1336 |

## FAQ

### Is Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct better than Qwen Plus?

Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.8 to 36.7 on the Noometry Index.

### Is Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct or Qwen Plus better for coding?

They score almost the same on coding (38.9 vs 38.3); test both on your own repository before choosing.

### How many benchmarks do Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct and Qwen Plus share?

12 benchmarks have published results for both models. Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct has 16 scored results on Noometry and Qwen Plus has 20.