Noometry

Model comparison

C4ai Aya Expanse 32b vs Qwen3.5-Flash

Qwen3.5-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.5 to 35.9 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 18 shared benchmarks.

C4ai Aya Expanse 32b Cohere

35.9

Rank #221 Confirmed

Qwen3.5-Flash Alibaba (Qwen)

42.5

Rank #112 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 18 benchmarks with published results for both. C4ai Aya Expanse 32b scores higher in 1 category and Qwen3.5-Flash in 7 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Qwen3.5-Flash leads 57.9 to 42.2.
  • Qwen3.5-Flash accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 128K.
  • C4ai Aya Expanse 32b has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

C4ai Aya Expanse 32bQwen3.5-Flash
ProviderCohereAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index35.942.5
Released2024-10-242026-02-23
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window128K1M
Max output4K66K
Input $ / M tokens—$0.10
Output $ / M tokens—$0.40
Results tracked1832

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding Too close to call

C4ai Aya Expanse 32b: 34.8 (#231), Qwen3.5-Flash: 34.2 (#242)

BenchmarkC4ai Aya Expanse 32bQwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Coding11971412
LMArena WebDev—1244
ALE-Bench—221.8

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

C4ai Aya Expanse 32b: —, Qwen3.5-Flash: —

BenchmarkC4ai Aya Expanse 32bQwen3.5-Flash
Vending-Bench 2—462.69

Reasoning Qwen3.5-Flash leads

C4ai Aya Expanse 32b: 23.3 (#180), Qwen3.5-Flash: 33.7 (#72)

BenchmarkC4ai Aya Expanse 32bQwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Hard Prompts11931403
Chess Puzzles—21%
Mystery Game Puzzles—20%
DTBench—82.9%
LMCA—29.1%
Epoch Capabilities Index—143.98

Math Qwen3.5-Flash leads

C4ai Aya Expanse 32b: 34.0 (#197), Qwen3.5-Flash: 37.4 (#158)

BenchmarkC4ai Aya Expanse 32bQwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Math12001407
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)—18.2%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—84.4%
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)—6.2%
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)—0%

Knowledge Qwen3.5-Flash leads

C4ai Aya Expanse 32b: 33.2 (#206), Qwen3.5-Flash: 43.2 (#93)

BenchmarkC4ai Aya Expanse 32bQwen3.5-Flash
Vectara Hallucination Rate10.9%10.5%
LMArena Expert11821407
GPQA Diamond—82.3%
SimpleQA Verified—20.3%

Multilingual Qwen3.5-Flash leads

C4ai Aya Expanse 32b: 38.4 (#230), Qwen3.5-Flash: 50.5 (#121)

BenchmarkC4ai Aya Expanse 32bQwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Non-English12131385
LMArena Chinese12111446
LMArena French12481412
LMArena German11991390
LMArena Japanese11631368
LMArena Korean11581344
LMArena Russian12271379
LMArena Spanish11931400

Instruction Following Qwen3.5-Flash leads

C4ai Aya Expanse 32b: 62.6 (#237), Qwen3.5-Flash: 72.6 (#139)

BenchmarkC4ai Aya Expanse 32bQwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Instruction Following11961374

Long Context Qwen3.5-Flash leads

C4ai Aya Expanse 32b: 37.2 (#220), Qwen3.5-Flash: 42.4 (#124)

BenchmarkC4ai Aya Expanse 32bQwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Longer Query12281392

Writing & Preference Qwen3.5-Flash leads

C4ai Aya Expanse 32b: 42.2 (#235), Qwen3.5-Flash: 57.9 (#122)

BenchmarkC4ai Aya Expanse 32bQwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Text12241397
LMArena Creative Writing12001343
LMArena Multi-Turn11901393

Frequently asked questions

Is C4ai Aya Expanse 32b better than Qwen3.5-Flash?

Qwen3.5-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.5 to 35.9 on the Noometry Index.

Is C4ai Aya Expanse 32b or Qwen3.5-Flash better for coding?

They score almost the same on coding (34.8 vs 34.2); test both on your own repository before choosing.

Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen3.5-Flash does, with 1M tokens against 128K.

How many benchmarks do C4ai Aya Expanse 32b and Qwen3.5-Flash share?

18 benchmarks have published results for both models. C4ai Aya Expanse 32b has 18 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.5-Flash has 32.

Related comparisons

Go deeper