Noometry

Model comparison

Grok-3 mini vs QwQ-32B

Grok-3 mini is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.2 to 39.8 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 24 shared benchmarks.

Grok-3 mini xAI

41.2

Rank #141 Confirmed

QwQ-32B Alibaba (Qwen)

39.8

Rank #159 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 24 benchmarks with published results for both. Grok-3 mini scores higher in 6 categories and QwQ-32B in 2 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where QwQ-32B leads 23.7 to 13.6.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is Aider Polyglot: 49.3% for Grok-3 mini and 20.9% for QwQ-32B.
  • QwQ-32B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Grok-3 miniQwQ-32B
ProviderxAIAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index41.239.8
Released2025-04-092024-11-28
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window——
Max output——
Input $ / M tokens——
Output $ / M tokens——
Results tracked3536

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), QwQ-32B: 35.4 (#226)

BenchmarkGrok-3 miniQwQ-32B
Aider Polyglot49.3%20.9%
LMArena Coding13791333
WeirdML42.6%—
BigCodeBench Instruct—44.6%
LiveBench Coding—72.2%
BigCodeBench Complete—54.4%

Reasoning QwQ-32B leads

Grok-3 mini: 13.6 (#334), QwQ-32B: 23.7 (#174)

BenchmarkGrok-3 miniQwQ-32B
LMArena Hard Prompts13751325
Epoch Capabilities Index140.35137.6
ARC-AGI-20.4%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark61.3%—
ARC-AGI-116.5%—
Chess Puzzles—5%
LiveBench Reasoning—83.5%
LiveBench Data Analysis—65%
ForecastBench—58.3
LiveBench—72%

Math Grok-3 mini leads

Grok-3 mini: 42.1 (#85), QwQ-32B: 38.0 (#143)

BenchmarkGrok-3 miniQwQ-32B
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202577.8%59.2%
LMArena Math13861359
Omni-MATH31.8%—
LiveBench Math—77.8%
MATH Level 590.9%—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)5.9%—

Knowledge Grok-3 mini leads

Grok-3 mini: 46.4 (#81), QwQ-32B: 37.2 (#158)

BenchmarkGrok-3 miniQwQ-32B
GPQA Diamond76.3%65.3%
Confabulations10.8%15.6%
LMArena Expert13951324
MMLU-Pro79.9%—
GPQA (HELM)67.5%—

Multilingual Grok-3 mini leads

Grok-3 mini: 48.1 (#145), QwQ-32B: 44.8 (#176)

BenchmarkGrok-3 miniQwQ-32B
LMArena Non-English13521305
LMArena Chinese13871378
LMArena French13571336
LMArena German13491313
LMArena Japanese13421262
LMArena Korean13351279
LMArena Russian13531297
LMArena Spanish13811354

Instruction Following Grok-3 mini leads

Grok-3 mini: 78.5 (#9), QwQ-32B: 72.6 (#137)

BenchmarkGrok-3 miniQwQ-32B
LMArena Instruction Following13571297
LiveBench Instruction Following—81.8%
IFEval95.1%—

Long Context QwQ-32B leads

Grok-3 mini: 41.0 (#147), QwQ-32B: 49.0 (#11)

BenchmarkGrok-3 miniQwQ-32B
Fiction.LiveBench66.7%83.3%
LMArena Longer Query13721308

Writing & Preference Grok-3 mini leads

Grok-3 mini: 52.5 (#169), QwQ-32B: 50.6 (#180)

BenchmarkGrok-3 miniQwQ-32B
LMArena Text13701329
LMArena Creative Writing13421288
Short-Story Creative Writing73.5%80.2%
LMArena Multi-Turn13551314
EQ-Bench Creative Writing—1257
WildBench65.1%—
LiveBench Language—51.4%

Frequently asked questions

Is Grok-3 mini better than QwQ-32B?

Grok-3 mini is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.2 to 39.8 on the Noometry Index.

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

Grok-3 mini scores higher on coding benchmarks: 40.8 versus 35.4 in the Noometry coding category.

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

24 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok-3 mini has 35 scored results on Noometry and QwQ-32B has 36.

Related comparisons

Go deeper