Model comparison
Gemma 3 1B vs Qwen3 32B
Qwen3 32B is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.2 to 21.1 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 4 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- They share 4 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 3 1B scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3 32B in 4 categories; 3 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen3 32B leads 40.0 to 7.0.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 1.1% for Gemma 3 1B and 66.9% for Qwen3 32B.
Side by side
| Gemma 3 1B | Qwen3 32B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | |
| Noometry Index | 21.1 | 39.2 |
| Released | 2025-03-12 | 2025-04 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | — | 131K |
| Max output | — | 16K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.70 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $2.80 |
| Results tracked | 4 | 26 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Not comparable
Gemma 3 1B: —, Qwen3 32B: 37.7 (#190)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 1B | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| Aider Polyglot | — | 40% |
| SciCode | — | 35.4% |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1358 |
Agentic & Tool Use Qwen3 32B leads
Gemma 3 1B: 13.7 (#152), Qwen3 32B: 32.6 (#62)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 1B | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 7.2% | 48.7% |
Reasoning Too close to call
Gemma 3 1B: 19.2 (#264), Qwen3 32B: 20.2 (#241)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 1B | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| Chess Puzzles | 0% | 5% |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 54.9% |
| CritPt | — | 0.3% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1334 |
| DTBench | — | 67.5% |
| LMCA | — | 17.3% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 138.51 |
Math Qwen3 32B leads
Gemma 3 1B: 10.2 (#316), Qwen3 32B: 39.7 (#99)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 1B | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 1.1% | 66.9% |
| LMArena Math | — | 1399 |
Knowledge Qwen3 32B leads
Gemma 3 1B: 7.0 (#314), Qwen3 32B: 40.0 (#125)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 1B | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 19.9% | 65.7% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 5.9% |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1362 |
Multilingual Not comparable
Gemma 3 1B: —, Qwen3 32B: 45.6 (#167)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 1B | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1317 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1357 |
| LMArena German | — | 1341 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1311 |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Gemma 3 1B: —, Qwen3 32B: 68.9 (#179)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 1B | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1305 |
Long Context Not comparable
Gemma 3 1B: —, Qwen3 32B: 43.8 (#87)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 1B | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 74.2% |
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1327 |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Gemma 3 1B: —, Qwen3 32B: 52.9 (#163)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 1B | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1340 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1297 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1331 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemma 3 1B better than Qwen3 32B?
Qwen3 32B is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.2 to 21.1 on the Noometry Index.
How many benchmarks do Gemma 3 1B and Qwen3 32B share?
4 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 3 1B has 4 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3 32B has 26.