Noometry

Model comparison

Claude 3 Opus vs Qwen1.5-32B

Claude 3 Opus and Qwen1.5-32B score almost the same on the Noometry Index (29.5 vs 30.5), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.

Last verified . 21 shared benchmarks.

Claude 3 Opus Anthropic

29.5

Rank #310 Confirmed

Qwen1.5-32B Alibaba (Qwen)

30.5

Rank #293 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 21 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude 3 Opus scores higher in 6 categories and Qwen1.5-32B in 2 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where Qwen1.5-32B leads 33.0 to 14.8.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is GPQA Diamond: 47.2% for Claude 3 Opus and 30.7% for Qwen1.5-32B.
  • Qwen1.5-32B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Claude 3 OpusQwen1.5-32B
ProviderAnthropicAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index29.530.5
Released2024-02-292024-02-04
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window——
Max output——
Input $ / M tokens——
Output $ / M tokens——
Results tracked4621

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

Category by category

Coding Claude 3 Opus leads

Claude 3 Opus: 32.9 (#267), Qwen1.5-32B: 31.7 (#282)

BenchmarkClaude 3 OpusQwen1.5-32B
BigCodeBench Instruct45.5%32.3%
LMArena Coding12641155
BigCodeBench Complete57.4%42%
WeirdML19.2%—
LiveBench Coding38.6%—
HumanEval+77.4%—
MBPP+73.3%—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Claude 3 Opus: 24.6 (#116), Qwen1.5-32B: —

BenchmarkClaude 3 OpusQwen1.5-32B
Cybench10%—
METR Time Horizons29.5%—

Reasoning Qwen1.5-32B leads

Claude 3 Opus: 14.6 (#324), Qwen1.5-32B: 21.8 (#212)

BenchmarkClaude 3 OpusQwen1.5-32B
LMArena Hard Prompts12451130
SimpleBench23.5%—
Chess Puzzles5%—
EnigmaEval0.8%—
LiveBench Reasoning40.6%—
DTBench61.6%—
LiveBench Data Analysis57.9%—
LMCA17%—
Epoch Capabilities Index126.91—
ForecastBench58.4—
LiveBench49.2%—
WinoGrande88.5%—

Math Qwen1.5-32B leads

Claude 3 Opus: 14.8 (#299), Qwen1.5-32B: 33.0 (#207)

BenchmarkClaude 3 OpusQwen1.5-32B
LMArena Math12731155
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-20254.7%—
LiveBench Math43.6%—
MATH Level 537.5%—

Knowledge Claude 3 Opus leads

Claude 3 Opus: 24.5 (#267), Qwen1.5-32B: 13.5 (#296)

BenchmarkClaude 3 OpusQwen1.5-32B
GPQA Diamond47.2%30.7%
LMArena Expert12231126
MMLU84.6%74.4%
SimpleQA Verified12.6%—
Confabulations22.7%—

Multimodal Not comparable

Claude 3 Opus: 27.1 (#116), Qwen1.5-32B: —

BenchmarkClaude 3 OpusQwen1.5-32B
LMArena Vision1023—

Multilingual Claude 3 Opus leads

Claude 3 Opus: 41.4 (#207), Qwen1.5-32B: 31.4 (#259)

BenchmarkClaude 3 OpusQwen1.5-32B
LMArena Non-English12581106
LMArena Chinese12481177
LMArena French12751101
LMArena German12581058
LMArena Japanese12041027
LMArena Korean11871008
LMArena Russian12801073
LMArena Spanish12461089

Instruction Following Claude 3 Opus leads

Claude 3 Opus: 64.1 (#228), Qwen1.5-32B: 57.7 (#265)

BenchmarkClaude 3 OpusQwen1.5-32B
LMArena Instruction Following12481116
LiveBench Instruction Following63.9%—

Long Context Claude 3 Opus leads

Claude 3 Opus: 38.2 (#202), Qwen1.5-32B: 34.7 (#246)

BenchmarkClaude 3 OpusQwen1.5-32B
LMArena Longer Query12591146

Writing & Preference Claude 3 Opus leads

Claude 3 Opus: 47.2 (#213), Qwen1.5-32B: 34.2 (#271)

BenchmarkClaude 3 OpusQwen1.5-32B
LMArena Text12621137
LMArena Creative Writing12351083
LMArena Multi-Turn12751140
LiveBench Language50.4%—

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude 3 Opus better than Qwen1.5-32B?

Claude 3 Opus and Qwen1.5-32B score almost the same on the Noometry Index (29.5 vs 30.5), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.

Is Claude 3 Opus or Qwen1.5-32B better for coding?

Claude 3 Opus scores higher on coding benchmarks: 32.9 versus 31.7 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Claude 3 Opus and Qwen1.5-32B share?

21 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude 3 Opus has 46 scored results on Noometry and Qwen1.5-32B has 21.

Related comparisons

Go deeper