# Olmo 3 32b Think vs Qwen2.5 7B Instruct

> Olmo 3 32b Think is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.7 to 29.0 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/olmo-3-32b-think-vs-qwen2-5-7b-instruct
- Last updated: 2026-10-12
- Shared benchmarks: 0

## Summary

- The widest gap is in math, where Olmo 3 32b Think leads 36.5 to 12.6.

## Snapshot

| | Olmo 3 32b Think | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Allen Institute for AI (Ai2) | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 38.7 | 29.0 |
| Rank | 183 | 320 |
| Context | — | 131K |
| Input $/M | — | $0.17 |
| Output $/M | — | $0.70 |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- Olmo 3 32b Think: 38.6 (#172)
- Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 36.5 (#208)

| Benchmark | Olmo 3 32b Think | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 37.6% |
| LMArena Coding | 1319 | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 46.1% |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Olmo 3 32b Think: —
- Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 23.8 (#124)

| Benchmark | Olmo 3 32b Think | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| BALROG | — | 7.8% |

## Reasoning

- Olmo 3 32b Think: 25.9 (#140)
- Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 14.8 (#322)

| Benchmark | Olmo 3 32b Think | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Chess Puzzles | — | 0% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1302 | — |
| DTBench | — | 47.7% |
| LMCA | — | 6.4% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 118.51 |

## Math

- Olmo 3 32b Think: 36.5 (#165)
- Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 12.6 (#306)

| Benchmark | Olmo 3 32b Think | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 2.5% |
| Omni-MATH | — | 29.4% |
| LMArena Math | 1316 | — |

## Knowledge

- Olmo 3 32b Think: 35.0 (#190)
- Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 17.0 (#286)

| Benchmark | Olmo 3 32b Think | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 35.5% |
| MMLU-Pro | — | 53.9% |
| GPQA (HELM) | — | 34.1% |
| LMArena Expert | 1273 | — |
| MMLU | — | 72.9% |

## Multilingual

- Olmo 3 32b Think: 41.2 (#210)
- Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: —

| Benchmark | Olmo 3 32b Think | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1255 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1300 | — |
| LMArena French | 1291 | — |
| LMArena German | 1290 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1254 | — |

## Instruction Following

- Olmo 3 32b Think: 67.2 (#198)
- Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 63.2 (#231)

| Benchmark | Olmo 3 32b Think | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| IFEval | — | 74.1% |
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1275 | — |

## Long Context

- Olmo 3 32b Think: 39.4 (#182)
- Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: —

| Benchmark | Olmo 3 32b Think | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1296 | — |

## Writing & Preference

- Olmo 3 32b Think: 49.1 (#193)
- Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 48.8 (#195)

| Benchmark | Olmo 3 32b Think | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1300 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1256 | — |
| WildBench | — | 73.1% |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1290 | — |

## FAQ

### Is Olmo 3 32b Think better than Qwen2.5 7B Instruct?

Olmo 3 32b Think is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.7 to 29.0 on the Noometry Index.

### Is Olmo 3 32b Think or Qwen2.5 7B Instruct better for coding?

Olmo 3 32b Think scores higher on coding benchmarks: 38.6 versus 36.5 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do Olmo 3 32b Think and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Olmo 3 32b Think has 14 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct has 15.