Noometry

Model comparison

Claude Opus 5.5 vs Qwen3 32B

Claude Opus 5.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 68.5 to 38.8 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3 32B costs 6.5× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 5.5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 17 shared benchmarks.

Claude Opus 5.5 Anthropic

68.5

Rank #3 Confirmed

Qwen3 32B Alibaba (Qwen)

38.8

Rank #166 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 5.5 scores higher in 9 categories and Qwen3 32B in 0 categories; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where Claude Opus 5.5 leads 79.5 to 19.6.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is LMCA: 68.2% for Claude Opus 5.5 and 17.3% for Qwen3 32B.
  • Qwen3 32B is cheaper at $0.70 / $2.80 per million input/output tokens, against $4 / $20 for Claude Opus 5.5.
  • Claude Opus 5.5 accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 131K.
  • Qwen3 32B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Claude Opus 5.5Qwen3 32B
ProviderAnthropicAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index68.538.8
Released2026-09-222025-04
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1M131K
Max output128K16K
Input $ / M tokens$4$0.70
Output $ / M tokens$20$2.80
Results tracked3526

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

Category by category

Coding Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 71.4 (#1), Qwen3 32B: 37.3 (#184)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen3 32B
SciCode66.9%35.4%
LMArena Coding15451358
FrontierCode54.4%—
Aider Polyglot—40%
CursorBench57.8%—
LMArena WebDev1820—
FrontierSWE62.3%—
MirrorCode77.4%—

Agentic & Tool Use Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 45.3 (#13), Qwen3 32B: 32.3 (#58)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen3 32B
APEX-Agents73.5%—
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard—48.7%
GDP.pdf30.6%—

Reasoning Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 79.5 (#2), Qwen3 32B: 19.6 (#233)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen3 32B
CritPt31.7%0.3%
LMArena Hard Prompts15451335
DTBench98.9%67.5%
LMCA68.2%17.3%
ARC-AGI-292.5%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark—54.9%
NYT Connections (extended)88.5%—
ARC-AGI-197.5%—
Chess Puzzles—5%
EBR-Bench71.4%—
Mystery Game Puzzles71%—
Epoch Capabilities Index—138.51

Math Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 92.4 (#2), Qwen3 32B: 37.9 (#89)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen3 32B
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025100%66.9%
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)91.2%—
FrontierMath Tier 495%—
ProofBench100%—
LMArena Math—1399

Knowledge Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 66.6 (#9), Qwen3 32B: 40.0 (#112)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen3 32B
GPQA Diamond90.6%65.7%
LMArena Expert15641362
SimpleQA Verified72.2%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate—5.9%

Multimodal Not comparable

Claude Opus 5.5: 56.5 (#2), Qwen3 32B: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen3 32B
Furniture Assembly83.3%—

Multilingual Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 59.8 (#1), Qwen3 32B: 45.8 (#162)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen3 32B
LMArena Non-English15131317
LMArena Chinese15721357
LMArena Russian15321311
LMArena German—1341

Instruction Following Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 80.1 (#2), Qwen3 32B: 69.1 (#174)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen3 32B
LMArena Instruction Following15351305

Long Context Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 47.3 (#18), Qwen3 32B: 43.7 (#83)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen3 32B
LMArena Longer Query15401327
Fiction.LiveBench—74.2%

Writing & Preference Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 78.7 (#3), Qwen3 32B: 53.1 (#158)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen3 32B
LMArena Text15181340
LMArena Creative Writing15381297
LMArena Multi-Turn15201331
EQ-Bench Creative Writing2050—

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Opus 5.5 better than Qwen3 32B?

Claude Opus 5.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 68.5 to 38.8 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3 32B costs 6.5× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 5.5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 5.5 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 5.5 lists at $4 and $20.

Is Claude Opus 5.5 or Qwen3 32B better for coding?

Claude Opus 5.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 71.4 versus 37.3 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Claude Opus 5.5 does, with 1M tokens against 131K.

How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 5.5 and Qwen3 32B share?

17 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 5.5 has 35 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3 32B has 26.

Related comparisons

Go deeper