Noometry

Model comparison

Claude Sonnet 5.5 vs Qwen1.5-32B

Claude Sonnet 5.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 60.5 to 30.0 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 1 shared benchmarks.

Claude Sonnet 5.5 Anthropic

60.5

Rank #10 Confirmed

Qwen1.5-32B Alibaba (Qwen)

30.0

Rank #288 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 1 benchmark with published results for both. Claude Sonnet 5.5 scores higher in 4 categories and Qwen1.5-32B in 0 categories; 4 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where Claude Sonnet 5.5 leads 88.7 to 30.5.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is GPQA Diamond: 95.6% for Claude Sonnet 5.5 and 30.7% for Qwen1.5-32B.
  • Qwen1.5-32B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Claude Sonnet 5.5Qwen1.5-32B
ProviderAnthropicAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index60.530.0
Released2026-09-282024-02-04
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1M—
Max output128K—
Input $ / M tokens$2—
Output $ / M tokens$10—
Results tracked1621

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

Category by category

Coding Claude Sonnet 5.5 leads

Claude Sonnet 5.5: 65.5 (#6), Qwen1.5-32B: 31.1 (#278)

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 5.5Qwen1.5-32B
FrontierCode52.1%—
CursorBench55.5%—
LMArena WebDev1699—
FrontierSWE61.9%—
SciCode61%—
BigCodeBench Instruct—32.3%
LMArena Coding—1155
BigCodeBench Complete—42%
ALE-Bench1,819—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Claude Sonnet 5.5: 44.9 (#14), Qwen1.5-32B: —

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 5.5Qwen1.5-32B
APEX-Agents75.5%—

Reasoning Claude Sonnet 5.5 leads

Claude Sonnet 5.5: 52.4 (#29), Qwen1.5-32B: 20.9 (#210)

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 5.5Qwen1.5-32B
CritPt31.4%—
LMArena Hard Prompts—1131
Mystery Game Puzzles65%—

Math Claude Sonnet 5.5 leads

Claude Sonnet 5.5: 88.7 (#4), Qwen1.5-32B: 30.5 (#207)

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 5.5Qwen1.5-32B
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)88.8%—
FrontierMath Tier 480.5%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025100%—
ProofBench100%—
LMArena Math—1155

Knowledge Claude Sonnet 5.5 leads

Claude Sonnet 5.5: 66.0 (#11), Qwen1.5-32B: 13.5 (#291)

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 5.5Qwen1.5-32B
GPQA Diamond95.6%30.7%
SimpleQA Verified46.5%—
LMArena Expert—1126
MMLU—74.4%

Multimodal Not comparable

Claude Sonnet 5.5: 53.2 (#5), Qwen1.5-32B: —

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 5.5Qwen1.5-32B
Furniture Assembly75%—

Multilingual Not comparable

Claude Sonnet 5.5: —, Qwen1.5-32B: 31.6 (#254)

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 5.5Qwen1.5-32B
LMArena Non-English—1106
LMArena Chinese—1176
LMArena French—1100
LMArena German—1058
LMArena Japanese—1027
LMArena Korean—1007
LMArena Russian—1073
LMArena Spanish—1089

Instruction Following Not comparable

Claude Sonnet 5.5: —, Qwen1.5-32B: 58.0 (#260)

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 5.5Qwen1.5-32B
LMArena Instruction Following—1116

Long Context Not comparable

Claude Sonnet 5.5: —, Qwen1.5-32B: 34.7 (#241)

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 5.5Qwen1.5-32B
LMArena Longer Query—1146

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Claude Sonnet 5.5: —, Qwen1.5-32B: 34.4 (#266)

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 5.5Qwen1.5-32B
LMArena Text—1137
LMArena Creative Writing—1083
LMArena Multi-Turn—1140

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Sonnet 5.5 better than Qwen1.5-32B?

Claude Sonnet 5.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 60.5 to 30.0 on the Noometry Index.

Is Claude Sonnet 5.5 or Qwen1.5-32B better for coding?

Claude Sonnet 5.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 65.5 versus 31.1 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Claude Sonnet 5.5 and Qwen1.5-32B share?

1 benchmark has published results for both models. Claude Sonnet 5.5 has 16 scored results on Noometry and Qwen1.5-32B has 21.

Related comparisons

Go deeper