Model comparison
Granite 4.1 8b vs Qwen3 32B
Qwen3 32B is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.2 to 37.4 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 12 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. Granite 4.1 8b scores higher in 1 category and Qwen3 32B in 7 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in coding, where Qwen3 32B leads 37.7 to 30.1.
Side by side
| Granite 4.1 8b | Qwen3 32B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | IBM | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 37.4 | 39.2 |
| Released | — | 2025-04 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | — | 131K |
| Max output | — | 16K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.70 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $2.80 |
| Results tracked | 13 | 26 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Qwen3 32B leads
Granite 4.1 8b: 30.1 (#297), Qwen3 32B: 37.7 (#190)
| Benchmark | Granite 4.1 8b | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1312 | 1358 |
| Aider Polyglot | — | 40% |
| LMArena WebDev | 1192 | — |
| SciCode | — | 35.4% |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Granite 4.1 8b: —, Qwen3 32B: 32.6 (#62)
| Benchmark | Granite 4.1 8b | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 48.7% |
Reasoning Granite 4.1 8b leads
Granite 4.1 8b: 25.7 (#143), Qwen3 32B: 20.2 (#241)
| Benchmark | Granite 4.1 8b | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1293 | 1334 |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 54.9% |
| CritPt | — | 0.3% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 5% |
| DTBench | — | 67.5% |
| LMCA | — | 17.3% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 138.51 |
Math Qwen3 32B leads
Granite 4.1 8b: 36.4 (#166), Qwen3 32B: 39.7 (#99)
| Benchmark | Granite 4.1 8b | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1312 | 1399 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 66.9% |
Knowledge Qwen3 32B leads
Granite 4.1 8b: 36.1 (#174), Qwen3 32B: 40.0 (#125)
| Benchmark | Granite 4.1 8b | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1309 | 1362 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 65.7% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 5.9% |
Multilingual Qwen3 32B leads
Granite 4.1 8b: 41.7 (#204), Qwen3 32B: 45.6 (#167)
| Benchmark | Granite 4.1 8b | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1261 | 1317 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1337 | 1357 |
| LMArena Russian | 1240 | 1311 |
| LMArena German | — | 1341 |
Instruction Following Qwen3 32B leads
Granite 4.1 8b: 66.9 (#203), Qwen3 32B: 68.9 (#179)
| Benchmark | Granite 4.1 8b | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1269 | 1305 |
Long Context Qwen3 32B leads
Granite 4.1 8b: 38.7 (#193), Qwen3 32B: 43.8 (#87)
| Benchmark | Granite 4.1 8b | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1275 | 1327 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 74.2% |
Writing & Preference Qwen3 32B leads
Granite 4.1 8b: 48.1 (#204), Qwen3 32B: 52.9 (#163)
| Benchmark | Granite 4.1 8b | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1290 | 1340 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1251 | 1297 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1268 | 1331 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Granite 4.1 8b better than Qwen3 32B?
Qwen3 32B is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.2 to 37.4 on the Noometry Index.
Is Granite 4.1 8b or Qwen3 32B better for coding?
Qwen3 32B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 37.7 versus 30.1 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Granite 4.1 8b and Qwen3 32B share?
12 benchmarks have published results for both models. Granite 4.1 8b has 13 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3 32B has 26.