Noometry

Model comparison

Claude Opus 4 vs Qwen3 32B

Claude Opus 4 is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.1 to 39.2 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3 32B costs 24× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 4's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 23 shared benchmarks.

Claude Opus 4 Anthropic

43.1

Rank #100 Confirmed

Qwen3 32B Alibaba (Qwen)

39.2

Rank #172 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 23 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 4 scores higher in 8 categories and Qwen3 32B in 1 category; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in coding, where Claude Opus 4 leads 47.2 to 37.7.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is Aider Polyglot: 72% for Claude Opus 4 and 40% for Qwen3 32B.
  • Qwen3 32B is cheaper at $0.70 / $2.80 per million input/output tokens, against $15 / $75 for Claude Opus 4.
  • Claude Opus 4 accepts more context: 200K tokens versus 131K.
  • Qwen3 32B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Claude Opus 4Qwen3 32B
ProviderAnthropicAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index43.139.2
Released2025-05-222025-04
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window200K131K
Max output32K16K
Input $ / M tokens$15$0.70
Output $ / M tokens$75$2.80
Results tracked5626

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

Category by category

Coding Claude Opus 4 leads

Claude Opus 4: 47.2 (#62), Qwen3 32B: 37.7 (#190)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4Qwen3 32B
Aider Polyglot72%40%
LMArena Coding14421358
SWE-bench Verified70.7%—
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)67.6%—
SciCode—35.4%
GSO6.9%—
WeirdML43.7%—
AlgoTune1.33—

Agentic & Tool Use Claude Opus 4 leads

Claude Opus 4: 34.8 (#42), Qwen3 32B: 32.6 (#62)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4Qwen3 32B
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard—48.7%
Cybench38%—
DeepResearch Bench46.8%—
LMArena Search1127—
METR Time Horizons63.9%—

Reasoning Claude Opus 4 leads

Claude Opus 4: 27.3 (#121), Qwen3 32B: 20.2 (#241)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4Qwen3 32B
Kagi LLM Benchmark74.3%54.9%
CritPt0.3%0.3%
LMArena Hard Prompts13991334
DTBench81.6%67.5%
LMCA37.4%17.3%
Epoch Capabilities Index142.67138.51
ARC-AGI-28.6%—
SimpleBench58.8%—
ARC-AGI-135.7%—
Chess Puzzles—5%
EnigmaEval5.6%—
ForecastBench61.1—

Math Claude Opus 4 leads

Claude Opus 4: 42.0 (#86), Qwen3 32B: 39.7 (#99)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4Qwen3 32B
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202564.4%66.9%
LMArena Math13901399
Omni-MATH61.6%—
MATH Level 585%—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)4.5%—
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)4.2%—

Knowledge Claude Opus 4 leads

Claude Opus 4: 44.0 (#88), Qwen3 32B: 40.0 (#125)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4Qwen3 32B
GPQA Diamond76.3%65.7%
Vectara Hallucination Rate12%5.9%
LMArena Expert13861362
Humanity's Last Exam10.7%—
MMLU-Pro87.5%—
Confabulations15.9%—
GPQA (HELM)70.8%—

Multimodal Not comparable

Claude Opus 4: 31.5 (#106), Qwen3 32B: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4Qwen3 32B
LMArena Vision1192—
GeoBench49%—
VPCT38%—

Multilingual Claude Opus 4 leads

Claude Opus 4: 48.8 (#138), Qwen3 32B: 45.6 (#167)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4Qwen3 32B
LMArena Non-English13621317
LMArena Chinese13861357
LMArena German13911341
LMArena Russian13921311
LMArena French1372—
LMArena Japanese1331—
LMArena Korean1321—
LMArena Spanish1389—

Instruction Following Claude Opus 4 leads

Claude Opus 4: 77.1 (#28), Qwen3 32B: 68.9 (#179)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4Qwen3 32B
LMArena Instruction Following14061305
IFEval91.8%—

Long Context Qwen3 32B leads

Claude Opus 4: 39.6 (#172), Qwen3 32B: 43.8 (#87)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4Qwen3 32B
Fiction.LiveBench61.1%74.2%
LMArena Longer Query14221327

Writing & Preference Claude Opus 4 leads

Claude Opus 4: 61.2 (#89), Qwen3 32B: 52.9 (#163)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4Qwen3 32B
LMArena Text13771340
LMArena Creative Writing13871297
LMArena Multi-Turn13961331
Short-Story Creative Writing83.6%—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1580—
WildBench85.2%—

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Opus 4 better than Qwen3 32B?

Claude Opus 4 is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.1 to 39.2 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3 32B costs 24× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 4's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4 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 lists at $15 and $75.

Is Claude Opus 4 or Qwen3 32B better for coding?

Claude Opus 4 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 47.2 versus 37.7 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Claude Opus 4 does, with 200K tokens against 131K.

How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 4 and Qwen3 32B share?

23 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 4 has 56 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3 32B has 26.

Related comparisons

Go deeper