Model comparison
ERNIE 5.1 vs QwQ-32B
ERNIE 5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.8 to 39.8 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 17 shared benchmarks.
Baidu
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. ERNIE 5.1 scores higher in 6 categories and QwQ-32B in 2 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where ERNIE 5.1 leads 65.1 to 50.6.
- QwQ-32B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| ERNIE 5.1 | QwQ-32B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Baidu | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 43.8 | 39.8 |
| Released | — | 2024-11-28 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | — | — |
| Max output | — | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Results tracked | 19 | 36 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding ERNIE 5.1 leads
ERNIE 5.1: 44.0 (#76), QwQ-32B: 35.4 (#226)
| Benchmark | ERNIE 5.1 | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1488 | 1333 |
| Aider Polyglot | — | 20.9% |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 44.6% |
| LiveBench Coding | — | 72.2% |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 54.4% |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
ERNIE 5.1: —, QwQ-32B: —
| Benchmark | ERNIE 5.1 | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Search | 1227 | — |
Reasoning QwQ-32B leads
ERNIE 5.1: 21.9 (#211), QwQ-32B: 23.7 (#174)
| Benchmark | ERNIE 5.1 | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1481 | 1325 |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 23.4% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 5% |
| LiveBench Reasoning | — | 83.5% |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | — | 65% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 137.6 |
| ForecastBench | — | 58.3 |
| LiveBench | — | 72% |
Math ERNIE 5.1 leads
ERNIE 5.1: 40.3 (#92), QwQ-32B: 38.0 (#143)
| Benchmark | ERNIE 5.1 | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1481 | 1359 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 59.2% |
| LiveBench Math | — | 77.8% |
Knowledge ERNIE 5.1 leads
ERNIE 5.1: 41.9 (#102), QwQ-32B: 37.2 (#158)
| Benchmark | ERNIE 5.1 | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1492 | 1324 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 65.3% |
| Confabulations | — | 15.6% |
Multilingual ERNIE 5.1 leads
ERNIE 5.1: 55.5 (#29), QwQ-32B: 44.8 (#176)
| Benchmark | ERNIE 5.1 | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1454 | 1305 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1508 | 1378 |
| LMArena French | 1488 | 1336 |
| LMArena German | 1470 | 1313 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1422 | 1262 |
| LMArena Korean | 1427 | 1279 |
| LMArena Russian | 1459 | 1297 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1473 | 1354 |
Instruction Following ERNIE 5.1 leads
ERNIE 5.1: 76.7 (#37), QwQ-32B: 72.6 (#137)
| Benchmark | ERNIE 5.1 | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1460 | 1297 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | — | 81.8% |
Long Context QwQ-32B leads
ERNIE 5.1: 44.7 (#59), QwQ-32B: 49.0 (#11)
| Benchmark | ERNIE 5.1 | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1462 | 1308 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 83.3% |
Writing & Preference ERNIE 5.1 leads
ERNIE 5.1: 65.1 (#52), QwQ-32B: 50.6 (#180)
| Benchmark | ERNIE 5.1 | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1468 | 1329 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1441 | 1288 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1471 | 1314 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | — | 80.2% |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 1257 |
| LiveBench Language | — | 51.4% |
Frequently asked questions
Is ERNIE 5.1 better than QwQ-32B?
ERNIE 5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.8 to 39.8 on the Noometry Index.
Is ERNIE 5.1 or QwQ-32B better for coding?
ERNIE 5.1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 44.0 versus 35.4 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do ERNIE 5.1 and QwQ-32B share?
17 benchmarks have published results for both models. ERNIE 5.1 has 19 scored results on Noometry and QwQ-32B has 36.