Noometry

Model comparison

Claude Opus 4.1 vs Qwen3 32B

Claude Opus 4.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.0 to 39.2 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3 32B costs 24× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 4.1's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 20 shared benchmarks.

Claude Opus 4.1 Anthropic

41.0

Rank #142 Confirmed

Qwen3 32B Alibaba (Qwen)

39.2

Rank #172 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 20 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 4.1 scores higher in 8 categories and Qwen3 32B in 1 category; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where Qwen3 32B leads 39.7 to 22.3.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is LMCA: 37.1% for Claude Opus 4.1 and 17.3% for Qwen3 32B.
  • Qwen3 32B is cheaper at $0.70 / $2.80 per million input/output tokens, against $15 / $75 for Claude Opus 4.1.
  • Claude Opus 4.1 accepts more context: 200K tokens versus 131K.
  • Qwen3 32B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Claude Opus 4.1Qwen3 32B
ProviderAnthropicAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index41.039.2
Released2025-08-052025-04
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window200K131K
Max output32K16K
Input $ / M tokens$15$0.70
Output $ / M tokens$75$2.80
Results tracked4826

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

Category by category

Coding Claude Opus 4.1 leads

Claude Opus 4.1: 44.4 (#73), Qwen3 32B: 37.7 (#190)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Qwen3 32B
LMArena Coding14791358
SWE-bench Verified73.3%—
Aider Polyglot—40%
LMArena WebDev1390—
SciCode—35.4%
WeirdML45.9%—
ALE-Bench674.77—
AlgoTune1.34—

Agentic & Tool Use Claude Opus 4.1 leads

Claude Opus 4.1: 35.0 (#41), Qwen3 32B: 32.6 (#62)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Qwen3 32B
Terminal-Bench38%—
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard—48.7%
GDPval43.6%—
Cybench42%—
DeepResearch Bench48.3%—
LMArena Search1148—
METR Time Horizons66.8%—

Reasoning Claude Opus 4.1 leads

Claude Opus 4.1: 32.2 (#76), Qwen3 32B: 20.2 (#241)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Qwen3 32B
Chess Puzzles7%5%
LMArena Hard Prompts14431334
DTBench80%67.5%
LMCA37.1%17.3%
Epoch Capabilities Index144.12138.51
SimpleBench60%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark—54.9%
CritPt—0.3%
EnigmaEval7.2%—
EBR-Bench7.9%—
Mystery Game Puzzles21%—
ForecastBench62—

Math Qwen3 32B leads

Claude Opus 4.1: 22.3 (#277), Qwen3 32B: 39.7 (#99)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Qwen3 32B
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202568.9%66.9%
LMArena Math14311399
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)12.6%—
FrontierMath Tier 42.4%—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)7.2%—
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)4.2%—

Knowledge Claude Opus 4.1 leads

Claude Opus 4.1: 42.0 (#101), Qwen3 32B: 40.0 (#125)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Qwen3 32B
GPQA Diamond77.3%65.7%
Vectara Hallucination Rate11.8%5.9%
LMArena Expert14391362
Humanity's Last Exam11.5%—
Confabulations17.1%—

Multimodal Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.1: 26.8 (#119), Qwen3 32B: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Qwen3 32B
VPCT35%—

Multilingual Claude Opus 4.1 leads

Claude Opus 4.1: 52.0 (#95), Qwen3 32B: 45.6 (#167)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Qwen3 32B
LMArena Non-English14051317
LMArena Chinese14271357
LMArena German14131341
LMArena Russian14221311
LMArena French1431—
LMArena Japanese1378—
LMArena Korean1380—
LMArena Spanish1448—

Instruction Following Claude Opus 4.1 leads

Claude Opus 4.1: 75.6 (#58), Qwen3 32B: 68.9 (#179)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Qwen3 32B
LMArena Instruction Following14351305

Long Context Too close to call

Claude Opus 4.1: 44.5 (#63), Qwen3 32B: 43.8 (#87)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Qwen3 32B
LMArena Longer Query14551327
Fiction.LiveBench—74.2%

Writing & Preference Claude Opus 4.1 leads

Claude Opus 4.1: 62.4 (#74), Qwen3 32B: 52.9 (#163)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Qwen3 32B
LMArena Text14191340
LMArena Creative Writing14121297
LMArena Multi-Turn14441331
Short-Story Creative Writing84.7%—

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Opus 4.1 better than Qwen3 32B?

Claude Opus 4.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.0 to 39.2 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3 32B costs 24× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 4.1's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.1 or Qwen3 32B?

Qwen3 32B is cheaper. It lists at $0.70 per million input tokens and $2.80 per million output tokens; Claude Opus 4.1 lists at $15 and $75.

Is Claude Opus 4.1 or Qwen3 32B better for coding?

Claude Opus 4.1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 44.4 versus 37.7 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Claude Opus 4.1 does, with 200K tokens against 131K.

How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 4.1 and Qwen3 32B share?

20 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 4.1 has 48 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3 32B has 26.

Related comparisons

Go deeper