Model comparison
GPT-6 Luna vs Qwen3 32B
GPT-6 Luna is the stronger model overall, scoring 53.3 to 39.2 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 21 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- They share 21 benchmarks with published results for both. GPT-6 Luna scores higher in 8 categories and Qwen3 32B in 1 category; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where GPT-6 Luna leads 76.1 to 39.7.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 98.9% for GPT-6 Luna and 66.9% for Qwen3 32B.
- GPT-6 Luna is cheaper at $0.10 / $0.50 per million input/output tokens, against $0.70 / $2.80 for Qwen3 32B.
- GPT-6 Luna accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 131K.
- Qwen3 32B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| GPT-6 Luna | Qwen3 32B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenAI | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 53.3 | 39.2 |
| Released | 2026-09-22 | 2025-04 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 1.05M | 131K |
| Max output | 128K | 16K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.10 | $0.70 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.50 | $2.80 |
| Results tracked | 42 | 26 |
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), Qwen3 32B: 37.7 (#190)
| Benchmark | GPT-6 Luna | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | 54.6% | 35.4% |
| LMArena Coding | 1439 | 1358 |
| DeepSWE | 66.6% | — |
| FrontierCode | 42.4% | — |
| Aider Polyglot | — | 40% |
| LMArena WebDev | 1581 | — |
| ALE-Bench | 1,577 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Too close to call
GPT-6 Luna: 33.3 (#54), Qwen3 32B: 32.6 (#62)
| Benchmark | GPT-6 Luna | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | 44.3% | — |
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 48.7% |
| GDP.pdf | 23% | — |
Reasoning GPT-6 Luna leads
GPT-6 Luna: 48.2 (#41), Qwen3 32B: 20.2 (#241)
| Benchmark | GPT-6 Luna | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| CritPt | 19.4% | 0.3% |
| Chess Puzzles | 31% | 5% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1411 | 1334 |
| DTBench | 90.1% | 67.5% |
| LMCA | 44.5% | 17.3% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 156.28 | 138.51 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 59.3% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 54.9% |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 68.7% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 86.7% | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 7% | — |
Math GPT-6 Luna leads
GPT-6 Luna: 76.1 (#15), Qwen3 32B: 39.7 (#99)
| Benchmark | GPT-6 Luna | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 98.9% | 66.9% |
| LMArena Math | 1416 | 1399 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 78.9% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 56.1% | — |
| ProofBench | 64% | — |
Knowledge GPT-6 Luna leads
GPT-6 Luna: 57.0 (#41), Qwen3 32B: 40.0 (#125)
| Benchmark | GPT-6 Luna | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 90.5% | 65.7% |
| LMArena Expert | 1444 | 1362 |
| SimpleQA Verified | 41.4% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 5.9% |
Multimodal Not comparable
GPT-6 Luna: 42.4 (#30), Qwen3 32B: —
| Benchmark | GPT-6 Luna | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1217 | — |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | 31.2% | — |
| Furniture Assembly | 44.2% | — |
Multilingual GPT-6 Luna leads
GPT-6 Luna: 50.5 (#117), Qwen3 32B: 45.6 (#167)
| Benchmark | GPT-6 Luna | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1386 | 1317 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1433 | 1357 |
| LMArena German | 1369 | 1341 |
| LMArena Russian | 1394 | 1311 |
| LMArena French | 1420 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1369 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1360 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1393 | — |
Instruction Following GPT-6 Luna leads
GPT-6 Luna: 74.3 (#99), Qwen3 32B: 68.9 (#179)
| Benchmark | GPT-6 Luna | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1409 | 1305 |
Long Context Too close to call
GPT-6 Luna: 43.0 (#111), Qwen3 32B: 43.8 (#87)
| Benchmark | GPT-6 Luna | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1409 | 1327 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 74.2% |
Writing & Preference GPT-6 Luna leads
GPT-6 Luna: 58.3 (#119), Qwen3 32B: 52.9 (#163)
| Benchmark | GPT-6 Luna | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1391 | 1340 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1363 | 1297 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1396 | 1331 |
Frequently asked questions
Is GPT-6 Luna better than Qwen3 32B?
GPT-6 Luna is the stronger model overall, scoring 53.3 to 39.2 on the Noometry Index.
Which is cheaper, GPT-6 Luna or Qwen3 32B?
GPT-6 Luna is cheaper. It lists at $0.10 per million input tokens and $0.50 per million output tokens; Qwen3 32B lists at $0.70 and $2.80.
Is GPT-6 Luna or Qwen3 32B better for coding?
GPT-6 Luna scores higher on coding benchmarks: 55.5 versus 37.7 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
GPT-6 Luna does, with 1.05M tokens against 131K.
How many benchmarks do GPT-6 Luna and Qwen3 32B share?
21 benchmarks have published results for both models. GPT-6 Luna has 42 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3 32B has 26.