Noometry

Model comparison

GPT-6 Luna vs Qwen1.5-32B

GPT-6 Luna is the stronger model overall, scoring 53.3 to 30.5 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 18 shared benchmarks.

GPT-6 Luna OpenAI

53.3

Rank #36 Confirmed

Qwen1.5-32B Alibaba (Qwen)

30.5

Rank #293 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 18 benchmarks with published results for both. GPT-6 Luna scores higher in 8 categories and Qwen1.5-32B in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where GPT-6 Luna leads 57.0 to 13.5.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is GPQA Diamond: 90.5% for GPT-6 Luna and 30.7% for Qwen1.5-32B.
  • Qwen1.5-32B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

GPT-6 LunaQwen1.5-32B
ProviderOpenAIAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index53.330.5
Released2026-09-222024-02-04
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1.05M—
Max output128K—
Input $ / M tokens$0.10—
Output $ / M tokens$0.50—
Results tracked4221

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

Category by category

Coding GPT-6 Luna leads

GPT-6 Luna: 55.5 (#25), Qwen1.5-32B: 31.7 (#282)

BenchmarkGPT-6 LunaQwen1.5-32B
LMArena Coding14391155
DeepSWE66.6%—
FrontierCode42.4%—
LMArena WebDev1581—
SciCode54.6%—
BigCodeBench Instruct—32.3%
BigCodeBench Complete—42%
ALE-Bench1,577—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

GPT-6 Luna: 33.3 (#54), Qwen1.5-32B: —

BenchmarkGPT-6 LunaQwen1.5-32B
APEX-Agents44.3%—
GDP.pdf23%—

Reasoning GPT-6 Luna leads

GPT-6 Luna: 48.2 (#41), Qwen1.5-32B: 21.8 (#212)

BenchmarkGPT-6 LunaQwen1.5-32B
LMArena Hard Prompts14111130
ARC-AGI-259.3%—
NYT Connections (extended)68.7%—
ARC-AGI-186.7%—
CritPt19.4%—
Chess Puzzles31%—
Mystery Game Puzzles7%—
DTBench90.1%—
LMCA44.5%—
Epoch Capabilities Index156.28—

Math GPT-6 Luna leads

GPT-6 Luna: 76.1 (#15), Qwen1.5-32B: 33.0 (#207)

BenchmarkGPT-6 LunaQwen1.5-32B
LMArena Math14161155
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)78.9%—
FrontierMath Tier 456.1%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202598.9%—
ProofBench64%—

Knowledge GPT-6 Luna leads

GPT-6 Luna: 57.0 (#41), Qwen1.5-32B: 13.5 (#296)

BenchmarkGPT-6 LunaQwen1.5-32B
GPQA Diamond90.5%30.7%
LMArena Expert14441126
SimpleQA Verified41.4%—
MMLU—74.4%

Multimodal Not comparable

GPT-6 Luna: 42.4 (#30), Qwen1.5-32B: —

BenchmarkGPT-6 LunaQwen1.5-32B
LMArena Vision1217—
Blueprint-Bench 231.2%—
Furniture Assembly44.2%—

Multilingual GPT-6 Luna leads

GPT-6 Luna: 50.5 (#117), Qwen1.5-32B: 31.4 (#259)

BenchmarkGPT-6 LunaQwen1.5-32B
LMArena Non-English13861106
LMArena Chinese14331177
LMArena French14201101
LMArena German13691058
LMArena Japanese13691027
LMArena Korean13601008
LMArena Russian13941073
LMArena Spanish13931089

Instruction Following GPT-6 Luna leads

GPT-6 Luna: 74.3 (#99), Qwen1.5-32B: 57.7 (#265)

BenchmarkGPT-6 LunaQwen1.5-32B
LMArena Instruction Following14091116

Long Context GPT-6 Luna leads

GPT-6 Luna: 43.0 (#111), Qwen1.5-32B: 34.7 (#246)

BenchmarkGPT-6 LunaQwen1.5-32B
LMArena Longer Query14091146

Writing & Preference GPT-6 Luna leads

GPT-6 Luna: 58.3 (#119), Qwen1.5-32B: 34.2 (#271)

BenchmarkGPT-6 LunaQwen1.5-32B
LMArena Text13911137
LMArena Creative Writing13631083
LMArena Multi-Turn13961140

Frequently asked questions

Is GPT-6 Luna better than Qwen1.5-32B?

GPT-6 Luna is the stronger model overall, scoring 53.3 to 30.5 on the Noometry Index.

Is GPT-6 Luna or Qwen1.5-32B better for coding?

GPT-6 Luna scores higher on coding benchmarks: 55.5 versus 31.7 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do GPT-6 Luna and Qwen1.5-32B share?

18 benchmarks have published results for both models. GPT-6 Luna has 42 scored results on Noometry and Qwen1.5-32B has 21.

Related comparisons

Go deeper