Model comparison
Claude Sonnet 5 vs QwQ-32B
Claude Sonnet 5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 54.6 to 39.8 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 23 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 23 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Sonnet 5 scores higher in 7 categories and QwQ-32B in 1 category; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Claude Sonnet 5 leads 66.2 to 38.0.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 94.7% for Claude Sonnet 5 and 59.2% for QwQ-32B.
- QwQ-32B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Claude Sonnet 5 | QwQ-32B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 54.6 | 39.8 |
| Released | 2026-06-29 | 2024-11-28 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 1M | — |
| Max output | 128K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $2 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $10 | — |
| Results tracked | 51 | 36 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Claude Sonnet 5 leads
Claude Sonnet 5: 55.5 (#26), QwQ-32B: 35.4 (#226)
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 5 | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1483 | 1333 |
| DeepSWE | 53.8% | — |
| FrontierCode | 42.7% | — |
| Aider Polyglot | — | 20.9% |
| CursorBench | 34.1% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1541 | — |
| SciCode | 54.3% | — |
| GSO | 37.3% | — |
| WeirdML | 68.8% | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 44.6% |
| LiveBench Coding | — | 72.2% |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 54.4% |
| ALE-Bench | 1,463 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Claude Sonnet 5: 42.8 (#18), QwQ-32B: —
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 5 | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | 54.5% | — |
| GBAEval | 65.3% | — |
| LMArena Search | 1194 | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 6,378 | — |
Reasoning Claude Sonnet 5 leads
Claude Sonnet 5: 49.1 (#39), QwQ-32B: 23.7 (#174)
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 5 | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| Chess Puzzles | 35% | 5% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1461 | 1325 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 156.21 | 137.6 |
| ForecastBench | 61.1 | 58.3 |
| SimpleBench | 60.6% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 75.1% | — |
| CritPt | 16.9% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | — | 83.5% |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 35% | — |
| DTBench | 92.5% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | — | 65% |
| LMCA | 50% | — |
| Surface Evolver Bench | 60% | — |
| Bench to the Future 3 | 0.14 | — |
| LiveBench | — | 72% |
Math Claude Sonnet 5 leads
Claude Sonnet 5: 66.2 (#27), QwQ-32B: 38.0 (#143)
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 5 | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 94.7% | 59.2% |
| LMArena Math | 1467 | 1359 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 65.6% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 29.3% | — |
| ProofBench | 77% | — |
| LiveBench Math | — | 77.8% |
Knowledge Claude Sonnet 5 leads
Claude Sonnet 5: 55.6 (#47), QwQ-32B: 37.2 (#158)
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 5 | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 90.5% | 65.3% |
| LMArena Expert | 1490 | 1324 |
| SimpleQA Verified | 33.7% | — |
| Confabulations | — | 15.6% |
Multimodal Not comparable
Claude Sonnet 5: 42.4 (#31), QwQ-32B: —
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 5 | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1274 | — |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | 24.9% | — |
| LMArena Document | 1466 | — |
Multilingual Claude Sonnet 5 leads
Claude Sonnet 5: 53.8 (#55), QwQ-32B: 44.8 (#176)
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 5 | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1431 | 1305 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1477 | 1378 |
| LMArena French | 1460 | 1336 |
| LMArena German | 1440 | 1313 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1422 | 1262 |
| LMArena Korean | 1411 | 1279 |
| LMArena Russian | 1451 | 1297 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1437 | 1354 |
Instruction Following Claude Sonnet 5 leads
Claude Sonnet 5: 76.3 (#41), QwQ-32B: 72.6 (#137)
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 5 | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1452 | 1297 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | — | 81.8% |
Long Context QwQ-32B leads
Claude Sonnet 5: 44.8 (#55), QwQ-32B: 49.0 (#11)
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 5 | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1463 | 1308 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 83.3% |
Writing & Preference Claude Sonnet 5 leads
Claude Sonnet 5: 69.2 (#25), QwQ-32B: 50.6 (#180)
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 5 | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1442 | 1329 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1416 | 1288 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1794 | 1257 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1454 | 1314 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | — | 80.2% |
| EQ-Bench 4 | 1236 | — |
| LiveBench Language | — | 51.4% |
Frequently asked questions
Is Claude Sonnet 5 better than QwQ-32B?
Claude Sonnet 5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 54.6 to 39.8 on the Noometry Index.
Is Claude Sonnet 5 or QwQ-32B better for coding?
Claude Sonnet 5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 55.5 versus 35.4 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Claude Sonnet 5 and QwQ-32B share?
23 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Sonnet 5 has 51 scored results on Noometry and QwQ-32B has 36.