# Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct vs Qwen3 14B

> Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.4 to 35.5 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/olmo-3-1-32b-instruct-vs-qwen3-14b
- Last updated: 2026-10-12
- Shared benchmarks: 0

## Summary

- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct leads 26.4 to 18.5.

## Snapshot

| | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Allen Institute for AI (Ai2) | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 39.4 | 35.5 |
| Rank | 168 | 225 |
| Context | — | 131K |
| Input $/M | — | $0.35 |
| Output $/M | — | $1.40 |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 39.5 (#157)
- Qwen3 14B: 37.3 (#195)

| Benchmark | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | — | 31.6% |
| LMArena Coding | 1347 | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: —
- Qwen3 14B: 29.6 (#83)

| Benchmark | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 41% |

## Reasoning

- Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 26.4 (#132)
- Qwen3 14B: 18.5 (#280)

| Benchmark | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 49.1% |
| CritPt | — | 0% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 4% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1322 | — |
| DTBench | — | 64% |
| LMCA | — | 18.2% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 138.23 |

## Math

- Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 36.3 (#167)
- Qwen3 14B: 38.6 (#133)

| Benchmark | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 66.4% |
| LMArena Math | 1305 | — |

## Knowledge

- Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 36.1 (#175)
- Qwen3 14B: 39.3 (#134)

| Benchmark | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 63.8% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 5.4% |
| LMArena Expert | 1308 | — |

## Multilingual

- Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 42.6 (#191)
- Qwen3 14B: —

| Benchmark | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1275 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1304 | — |
| LMArena French | 1328 | — |
| LMArena German | 1282 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1206 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1268 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1336 | — |

## Instruction Following

- Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 68.6 (#187)
- Qwen3 14B: —

| Benchmark | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1299 | — |

## Long Context

- Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 39.9 (#166)
- Qwen3 14B: 38.1 (#204)

| Benchmark | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 62.5% |
| LMArena Longer Query | 1312 | — |

## Writing & Preference

- Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 50.2 (#185)
- Qwen3 14B: —

| Benchmark | Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1311 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1264 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1309 | — |

## FAQ

### Is Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct better than Qwen3 14B?

Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.4 to 35.5 on the Noometry Index.

### Is Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct or Qwen3 14B better for coding?

Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct scores higher on coding benchmarks: 39.5 versus 37.3 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct and Qwen3 14B share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct has 16 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3 14B has 12.