Noometry

Model comparison

Grok-3 mini vs Qwen3 32B

Grok-3 mini is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.2 to 39.2 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 19 shared benchmarks.

Grok-3 mini xAI

41.2

Rank #141 Confirmed

Qwen3 32B Alibaba (Qwen)

39.2

Rank #172 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 19 benchmarks with published results for both. Grok-3 mini scores higher in 5 categories and Qwen3 32B in 3 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in instruction following, where Grok-3 mini leads 78.5 to 68.9.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 77.8% for Grok-3 mini and 66.9% for Qwen3 32B.
  • Qwen3 32B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Grok-3 miniQwen3 32B
ProviderxAIAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index41.239.2
Released2025-04-092025-04
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window—131K
Max output—16K
Input $ / M tokens—$0.70
Output $ / M tokens—$2.80
Results tracked3526

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

Category by category

Coding Grok-3 mini leads

Grok-3 mini: 40.8 (#131), Qwen3 32B: 37.7 (#190)

BenchmarkGrok-3 miniQwen3 32B
Aider Polyglot49.3%40%
LMArena Coding13791358
SciCode—35.4%
WeirdML42.6%—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Grok-3 mini: —, Qwen3 32B: 32.6 (#62)

BenchmarkGrok-3 miniQwen3 32B
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard—48.7%

Reasoning Qwen3 32B leads

Grok-3 mini: 13.6 (#334), Qwen3 32B: 20.2 (#241)

BenchmarkGrok-3 miniQwen3 32B
Kagi LLM Benchmark61.3%54.9%
LMArena Hard Prompts13751334
Epoch Capabilities Index140.35138.51
ARC-AGI-20.4%—
ARC-AGI-116.5%—
CritPt—0.3%
Chess Puzzles—5%
DTBench—67.5%
LMCA—17.3%

Math Grok-3 mini leads

Grok-3 mini: 42.1 (#85), Qwen3 32B: 39.7 (#99)

BenchmarkGrok-3 miniQwen3 32B
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202577.8%66.9%
LMArena Math13861399
Omni-MATH31.8%—
MATH Level 590.9%—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)5.9%—

Knowledge Grok-3 mini leads

Grok-3 mini: 46.4 (#81), Qwen3 32B: 40.0 (#125)

BenchmarkGrok-3 miniQwen3 32B
GPQA Diamond76.3%65.7%
LMArena Expert13951362
MMLU-Pro79.9%—
Confabulations10.8%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate—5.9%
GPQA (HELM)67.5%—

Multilingual Grok-3 mini leads

Grok-3 mini: 48.1 (#145), Qwen3 32B: 45.6 (#167)

BenchmarkGrok-3 miniQwen3 32B
LMArena Non-English13521317
LMArena Chinese13871357
LMArena German13491341
LMArena Russian13531311
LMArena French1357—
LMArena Japanese1342—
LMArena Korean1335—
LMArena Spanish1381—

Instruction Following Grok-3 mini leads

Grok-3 mini: 78.5 (#9), Qwen3 32B: 68.9 (#179)

BenchmarkGrok-3 miniQwen3 32B
LMArena Instruction Following13571305
IFEval95.1%—

Long Context Qwen3 32B leads

Grok-3 mini: 41.0 (#147), Qwen3 32B: 43.8 (#87)

BenchmarkGrok-3 miniQwen3 32B
Fiction.LiveBench66.7%74.2%
LMArena Longer Query13721327

Writing & Preference Too close to call

Grok-3 mini: 52.5 (#169), Qwen3 32B: 52.9 (#163)

BenchmarkGrok-3 miniQwen3 32B
LMArena Text13701340
LMArena Creative Writing13421297
LMArena Multi-Turn13551331
Short-Story Creative Writing73.5%—
WildBench65.1%—

Frequently asked questions

Is Grok-3 mini better than Qwen3 32B?

Grok-3 mini is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.2 to 39.2 on the Noometry Index.

Is Grok-3 mini or Qwen3 32B better for coding?

Grok-3 mini scores higher on coding benchmarks: 40.8 versus 37.7 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Grok-3 mini and Qwen3 32B share?

19 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok-3 mini has 35 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3 32B has 26.

Related comparisons

Go deeper