Price Per TokenPrice Per Token
A
Allenai
vs
Qwen
Qwen

Olmo 3.1 32B Think vs Qwen3.5 397B A17B

A detailed comparison of pricing, benchmarks, and capabilities

Get our weekly newsletter on pricing changes, new releases, and tools.

Join the Price Per Token Community

Key Takeaways

Olmo 3.1 32B Think wins:

  • Cheaper input tokens
  • Cheaper output tokens
  • Faster response time
  • Better at math
  • Has reasoning mode

Qwen3.5 397B A17B wins:

  • Larger context window
  • Higher intelligence benchmark
  • Better at coding
  • Supports vision
  • Supports tool calls
Price Advantage
Olmo 3.1 32B Think
Benchmark Advantage
Qwen3.5 397B A17B
Context Window
Qwen3.5 397B A17B
Speed
Olmo 3.1 32B Think

Pricing Comparison

Benchmark Comparison

Context & Performance

Capabilities

Feature Comparison

FeatureOlmo 3.1 32B ThinkQwen3.5 397B A17B
Vision (Image Input)
Tool/Function Calls
Reasoning Mode
Audio Input
Audio Output
PDF Input
Prompt Caching
Web Search

License & Release

PropertyOlmo 3.1 32B ThinkQwen3.5 397B A17B
LicenseOpen SourceOpen Source
AuthorAllenaiQwen
ReleasedDec 2025Feb 2026

Olmo 3.1 32B Think Modalities

Input
text
Output
text

Qwen3.5 397B A17B Modalities

Input
textimagevideo
Output
text

Related Comparisons

See all model comparisons

Frequently Asked Questions

Olmo 3.1 32B Think has cheaper input pricing at $0.15/M tokens. Olmo 3.1 32B Think has cheaper output pricing at $0.50/M tokens.
Qwen3.5 397B A17B scores higher on coding benchmarks with a score of 37.4, compared to Olmo 3.1 32B Think's score of 9.8.
Olmo 3.1 32B Think has a 65,536 token context window, while Qwen3.5 397B A17B has a 262,144 token context window.
Olmo 3.1 32B Think does not support vision. Qwen3.5 397B A17B supports vision.

Built by @aellman

Archive
Follow us:
Advertise | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy

2026 68 Ventures, LLC. All rights reserved.