Model comparison
GPT-5.6 Luna vs QwQ-32B
GPT-5.6 Luna is the stronger model overall, scoring 54.6 to 39.8 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 22 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 22 benchmarks with published results for both. GPT-5.6 Luna 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 GPT-5.6 Luna leads 77.7 to 38.0.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 98.3% for GPT-5.6 Luna and 59.2% for QwQ-32B.
- QwQ-32B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| GPT-5.6 Luna | QwQ-32B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenAI | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 54.6 | 39.8 |
| Released | 2026-07-09 | 2024-11-28 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 1.05M | — |
| Max output | 128K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.20 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $1.20 | — |
| Results tracked | 52 | 36 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding GPT-5.6 Luna leads
GPT-5.6 Luna: 54.5 (#28), QwQ-32B: 35.4 (#226)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.6 Luna | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1466 | 1333 |
| DeepSWE | 67.2% | — |
| FrontierCode | 39.8% | — |
| Aider Polyglot | — | 20.9% |
| CursorBench | 35.9% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1519 | — |
| SciCode | 53.6% | — |
| WeirdML | 60.9% | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 44.6% |
| LiveBench Coding | — | 72.2% |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 54.4% |
| ALE-Bench | 1,667 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
GPT-5.6 Luna: 34.4 (#45), QwQ-32B: —
| Benchmark | GPT-5.6 Luna | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | 43% | — |
| BALROG | 45.6% | — |
| GDP.pdf | 22.7% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 4,095 | — |
Reasoning GPT-5.6 Luna leads
GPT-5.6 Luna: 47.6 (#43), QwQ-32B: 23.7 (#174)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.6 Luna | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| Chess Puzzles | 40% | 5% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1451 | 1325 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 156.39 | 137.6 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 59.5% | — |
| SimpleBench | 46.8% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 49.1% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 69.4% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 88% | — |
| CritPt | 20.6% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | — | 83.5% |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 21% | — |
| DTBench | 89.1% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | — | 65% |
| LMCA | 48.5% | — |
| Surface Evolver Bench | 61.9% | — |
| ForecastBench | — | 58.3 |
| LiveBench | — | 72% |
Math GPT-5.6 Luna leads
GPT-5.6 Luna: 77.7 (#14), QwQ-32B: 38.0 (#143)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.6 Luna | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 98.3% | 59.2% |
| LMArena Math | 1458 | 1359 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 82.1% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 61% | — |
| ProofBench | 60% | — |
| LiveBench Math | — | 77.8% |
Knowledge GPT-5.6 Luna leads
GPT-5.6 Luna: 58.5 (#34), QwQ-32B: 37.2 (#158)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.6 Luna | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 91.6% | 65.3% |
| LMArena Expert | 1478 | 1324 |
| SimpleQA Verified | 41% | — |
| Confabulations | — | 15.6% |
Multimodal Not comparable
GPT-5.6 Luna: 42.7 (#28), QwQ-32B: —
| Benchmark | GPT-5.6 Luna | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1258 | — |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | 22.6% | — |
| Furniture Assembly | 42.5% | — |
| LMArena Document | 1457 | — |
Multilingual GPT-5.6 Luna leads
GPT-5.6 Luna: 52.8 (#78), QwQ-32B: 44.8 (#176)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.6 Luna | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1417 | 1305 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1470 | 1378 |
| LMArena French | 1456 | 1336 |
| LMArena German | 1454 | 1313 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1411 | 1262 |
| LMArena Korean | 1415 | 1279 |
| LMArena Russian | 1428 | 1297 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1448 | 1354 |
Instruction Following GPT-5.6 Luna leads
GPT-5.6 Luna: 75.6 (#57), QwQ-32B: 72.6 (#137)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.6 Luna | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1437 | 1297 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | — | 81.8% |
Long Context QwQ-32B leads
GPT-5.6 Luna: 43.9 (#82), QwQ-32B: 49.0 (#11)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.6 Luna | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1436 | 1308 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 83.3% |
Writing & Preference GPT-5.6 Luna leads
GPT-5.6 Luna: 68.0 (#29), QwQ-32B: 50.6 (#180)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.6 Luna | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1431 | 1329 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1396 | 1288 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1829 | 1257 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1434 | 1314 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | — | 80.2% |
| EQ-Bench 4 | 1156 | — |
| LiveBench Language | — | 51.4% |
Frequently asked questions
Is GPT-5.6 Luna better than QwQ-32B?
GPT-5.6 Luna is the stronger model overall, scoring 54.6 to 39.8 on the Noometry Index.
Is GPT-5.6 Luna or QwQ-32B better for coding?
GPT-5.6 Luna scores higher on coding benchmarks: 54.5 versus 35.4 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do GPT-5.6 Luna and QwQ-32B share?
22 benchmarks have published results for both models. GPT-5.6 Luna has 52 scored results on Noometry and QwQ-32B has 36.