Noometry

Model comparison

GPT-5.5 Instant vs Qwen3 32B

GPT-5.5 Instant is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.7 to 39.2 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 19 shared benchmarks.

GPT-5.5 Instant OpenAI

42.7

Rank #110 Confirmed

Qwen3 32B Alibaba (Qwen)

39.2

Rank #172 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 19 benchmarks with published results for both. GPT-5.5 Instant scores higher in 6 categories and Qwen3 32B in 2 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where Qwen3 32B leads 39.7 to 26.5.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is GPQA Diamond: 82.5% for GPT-5.5 Instant and 65.7% for Qwen3 32B.
  • Qwen3 32B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

GPT-5.5 InstantQwen3 32B
ProviderOpenAIAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index42.739.2
Released2026-05-052025-04
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window—131K
Max output—16K
Input $ / M tokens—$0.70
Output $ / M tokens—$2.80
Results tracked2726

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

Category by category

Coding GPT-5.5 Instant leads

GPT-5.5 Instant: 44.3 (#74), Qwen3 32B: 37.7 (#190)

BenchmarkGPT-5.5 InstantQwen3 32B
SciCode48.6%35.4%
LMArena Coding14331358
Aider Polyglot—40%

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

GPT-5.5 Instant: —, Qwen3 32B: 32.6 (#62)

BenchmarkGPT-5.5 InstantQwen3 32B
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard—48.7%

Reasoning GPT-5.5 Instant leads

GPT-5.5 Instant: 24.9 (#155), Qwen3 32B: 20.2 (#241)

BenchmarkGPT-5.5 InstantQwen3 32B
CritPt0%0.3%
Chess Puzzles12%5%
LMArena Hard Prompts14261334
Epoch Capabilities Index142.52138.51
Kagi LLM Benchmark—54.9%
DTBench—67.5%
LMCA—17.3%

Math Qwen3 32B leads

GPT-5.5 Instant: 26.5 (#259), Qwen3 32B: 39.7 (#99)

BenchmarkGPT-5.5 InstantQwen3 32B
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202568.1%66.9%
LMArena Math14201399
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)26.3%—
FrontierMath Tier 42.4%—

Knowledge GPT-5.5 Instant leads

GPT-5.5 Instant: 48.9 (#74), Qwen3 32B: 40.0 (#125)

BenchmarkGPT-5.5 InstantQwen3 32B
GPQA Diamond82.5%65.7%
LMArena Expert14091362
Vectara Hallucination Rate—5.9%

Multimodal Not comparable

GPT-5.5 Instant: 40.0 (#52), Qwen3 32B: —

BenchmarkGPT-5.5 InstantQwen3 32B
LMArena Vision1250—
LMArena Document1403—

Multilingual GPT-5.5 Instant leads

GPT-5.5 Instant: 52.8 (#80), Qwen3 32B: 45.6 (#167)

BenchmarkGPT-5.5 InstantQwen3 32B
LMArena Non-English14171317
LMArena Chinese14561357
LMArena German14111341
LMArena Russian14311311
LMArena French1428—
LMArena Japanese1408—
LMArena Korean1392—
LMArena Spanish1429—

Instruction Following GPT-5.5 Instant leads

GPT-5.5 Instant: 74.2 (#100), Qwen3 32B: 68.9 (#179)

BenchmarkGPT-5.5 InstantQwen3 32B
LMArena Instruction Following14061305

Long Context Too close to call

GPT-5.5 Instant: 43.4 (#96), Qwen3 32B: 43.8 (#87)

BenchmarkGPT-5.5 InstantQwen3 32B
LMArena Longer Query14221327
Fiction.LiveBench—74.2%

Writing & Preference GPT-5.5 Instant leads

GPT-5.5 Instant: 61.8 (#85), Qwen3 32B: 52.9 (#163)

BenchmarkGPT-5.5 InstantQwen3 32B
LMArena Text14191340
LMArena Creative Writing14191297
LMArena Multi-Turn14331331

Frequently asked questions

Is GPT-5.5 Instant better than Qwen3 32B?

GPT-5.5 Instant is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.7 to 39.2 on the Noometry Index.

Is GPT-5.5 Instant or Qwen3 32B better for coding?

GPT-5.5 Instant scores higher on coding benchmarks: 44.3 versus 37.7 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do GPT-5.5 Instant and Qwen3 32B share?

19 benchmarks have published results for both models. GPT-5.5 Instant has 27 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3 32B has 26.

Related comparisons

Go deeper