Noometry

Model comparison

GPT-5 Nano vs QwQ-32B

QwQ-32B is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.8 to 33.5 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 23 shared benchmarks.

GPT-5 Nano OpenAI

33.5

Rank #241 Confirmed

QwQ-32B Alibaba (Qwen)

39.8

Rank #159 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 23 benchmarks with published results for both. GPT-5 Nano scores higher in 2 categories and QwQ-32B in 6 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in long context, where QwQ-32B leads 49.0 to 31.3.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is Fiction.LiveBench: 44.4% for GPT-5 Nano and 83.3% for QwQ-32B.
  • QwQ-32B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

GPT-5 NanoQwQ-32B
ProviderOpenAIAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index33.539.8
Released2025-08-072024-11-28
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window400K—
Max output128K—
Input $ / M tokens$0.05—
Output $ / M tokens$0.40—
Results tracked4936

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

Category by category

Coding QwQ-32B leads

GPT-5 Nano: 33.6 (#254), QwQ-32B: 35.4 (#226)

BenchmarkGPT-5 NanoQwQ-32B
LMArena Coding13511333
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)34.8%—
Aider Polyglot—20.9%
WeirdML38.1%—
BigCodeBench Instruct—44.6%
LiveBench Coding—72.2%
BigCodeBench Complete—54.4%
ALE-Bench718.67—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

GPT-5 Nano: 25.8 (#106), QwQ-32B: —

BenchmarkGPT-5 NanoQwQ-32B
Terminal-Bench21.8%—
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard51.5%—

Reasoning QwQ-32B leads

GPT-5 Nano: 16.3 (#306), QwQ-32B: 23.7 (#174)

BenchmarkGPT-5 NanoQwQ-32B
Chess Puzzles27%5%
LMArena Hard Prompts13281325
Epoch Capabilities Index139.38137.6
ForecastBench59.158.3
ARC-AGI-22.6%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark62.2%—
ARC-AGI-120.7%—
LiveBench Reasoning—83.5%
Mystery Game Puzzles9%—
DTBench62.7%—
LiveBench Data Analysis—65%
LMCA7.9%—
LiveBench—72%

Math QwQ-32B leads

GPT-5 Nano: 29.4 (#241), QwQ-32B: 38.0 (#143)

BenchmarkGPT-5 NanoQwQ-32B
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202581.1%59.2%
LMArena Math13171359
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)20%—
FrontierMath Tier 42.4%—
ProofBench12%—
Omni-MATH54.6%—
LiveBench Math—77.8%
MATH Level 595.2%—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)8.3%—
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)2.1%—

Knowledge QwQ-32B leads

GPT-5 Nano: 35.9 (#178), QwQ-32B: 37.2 (#158)

BenchmarkGPT-5 NanoQwQ-32B
GPQA Diamond69.4%65.3%
LMArena Expert13211324
SimpleQA Verified11.7%—
MMLU-Pro77.8%—
Confabulations—15.6%
Vectara Hallucination Rate10.5%—
GPQA (HELM)67.9%—

Multimodal Not comparable

GPT-5 Nano: 31.3 (#108), QwQ-32B: —

BenchmarkGPT-5 NanoQwQ-32B
LMArena Vision1159—
VPCT37.2%—

Multilingual Too close to call

GPT-5 Nano: 45.3 (#172), QwQ-32B: 44.8 (#176)

BenchmarkGPT-5 NanoQwQ-32B
LMArena Non-English13131305
LMArena Chinese13561378
LMArena German13271313
LMArena Japanese12261262
LMArena Korean12691279
LMArena Russian12961297
LMArena Spanish13601354
LMArena French—1336

Instruction Following GPT-5 Nano leads

GPT-5 Nano: 75.0 (#79), QwQ-32B: 72.6 (#137)

BenchmarkGPT-5 NanoQwQ-32B
LMArena Instruction Following13061297
LiveBench Instruction Following—81.8%
IFEval93.2%—

Long Context QwQ-32B leads

GPT-5 Nano: 31.3 (#281), QwQ-32B: 49.0 (#11)

BenchmarkGPT-5 NanoQwQ-32B
Fiction.LiveBench44.4%83.3%
LMArena Longer Query13121308

Writing & Preference QwQ-32B leads

GPT-5 Nano: 39.1 (#249), QwQ-32B: 50.6 (#180)

BenchmarkGPT-5 NanoQwQ-32B
LMArena Text13201329
LMArena Creative Writing12491288
EQ-Bench Creative Writing7051257
LMArena Multi-Turn13111314
Short-Story Creative Writing—80.2%
WildBench80.6%—
LiveBench Language—51.4%

Frequently asked questions

Is GPT-5 Nano better than QwQ-32B?

QwQ-32B is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.8 to 33.5 on the Noometry Index.

Is GPT-5 Nano or QwQ-32B better for coding?

QwQ-32B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 35.4 versus 33.6 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do GPT-5 Nano and QwQ-32B share?

23 benchmarks have published results for both models. GPT-5 Nano has 49 scored results on Noometry and QwQ-32B has 36.

Related comparisons

Go deeper