Noometry

Model comparison

Grok 4.3 vs QwQ-32B

Grok 4.3 is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.8 to 39.8 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 22 shared benchmarks.

Grok 4.3 xAI

43.8

Rank #86 Confirmed

QwQ-32B Alibaba (Qwen)

39.8

Rank #159 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 22 benchmarks with published results for both. Grok 4.3 scores higher in 6 categories and QwQ-32B in 2 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where Grok 4.3 leads 52.5 to 37.2.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 93.3% for Grok 4.3 and 59.2% for QwQ-32B.
  • QwQ-32B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Grok 4.3QwQ-32B
ProviderxAIAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index43.839.8
Released2026-04-172024-11-28
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1M—
Max output30K—
Input $ / M tokens$1.25—
Output $ / M tokens$2.50—
Results tracked4036

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

Category by category

Coding Grok 4.3 leads

Grok 4.3: 41.6 (#121), QwQ-32B: 35.4 (#226)

BenchmarkGrok 4.3QwQ-32B
LMArena Coding14151333
Aider Polyglot—20.9%
LMArena WebDev1357—
SciCode47.3%—
WeirdML49.9%—
BigCodeBench Instruct—44.6%
LiveBench Coding—72.2%
BigCodeBench Complete—54.4%
ALE-Bench944.17—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Grok 4.3: 27.7 (#99), QwQ-32B: —

BenchmarkGrok 4.3QwQ-32B
GDP.pdf8%—
LMArena Search1165—
Vending-Bench 235.26—

Reasoning Grok 4.3 leads

Grok 4.3: 35.9 (#68), QwQ-32B: 23.7 (#174)

BenchmarkGrok 4.3QwQ-32B
Chess Puzzles25%5%
LMArena Hard Prompts13961325
Epoch Capabilities Index149.16137.6
ForecastBench60.358.3
NYT Connections (extended)55.2%—
CritPt8%—
LiveBench Reasoning—83.5%
DTBench90.7%—
LiveBench Data Analysis—65%
LMCA38.3%—
LiveBench—72%

Math Grok 4.3 leads

Grok 4.3: 46.0 (#74), QwQ-32B: 38.0 (#143)

BenchmarkGrok 4.3QwQ-32B
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202593.3%59.2%
LMArena Math13881359
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)42.8%—
FrontierMath Tier 414.6%—
ProofBench11%—
LiveBench Math—77.8%

Knowledge Grok 4.3 leads

Grok 4.3: 52.5 (#62), QwQ-32B: 37.2 (#158)

BenchmarkGrok 4.3QwQ-32B
GPQA Diamond88.8%65.3%
LMArena Expert13851324
SimpleQA Verified33.2%—
Confabulations—15.6%

Multimodal Not comparable

Grok 4.3: 31.6 (#104), QwQ-32B: —

BenchmarkGrok 4.3QwQ-32B
LMArena Vision1229—
Blueprint-Bench 20%—

Multilingual Grok 4.3 leads

Grok 4.3: 50.5 (#120), QwQ-32B: 44.8 (#176)

BenchmarkGrok 4.3QwQ-32B
LMArena Non-English13851305
LMArena Chinese14221378
LMArena French14121336
LMArena German13951313
LMArena Japanese13791262
LMArena Korean13561279
LMArena Russian13991297
LMArena Spanish13981354

Instruction Following Too close to call

Grok 4.3: 72.1 (#140), QwQ-32B: 72.6 (#137)

BenchmarkGrok 4.3QwQ-32B
LMArena Instruction Following13661297
LiveBench Instruction Following—81.8%

Long Context QwQ-32B leads

Grok 4.3: 42.5 (#123), QwQ-32B: 49.0 (#11)

BenchmarkGrok 4.3QwQ-32B
LMArena Longer Query13931308
Fiction.LiveBench—83.3%

Writing & Preference Grok 4.3 leads

Grok 4.3: 58.5 (#118), QwQ-32B: 50.6 (#180)

BenchmarkGrok 4.3QwQ-32B
LMArena Text13971329
LMArena Creative Writing13801288
LMArena Multi-Turn14061314
Short-Story Creative Writing—80.2%
EQ-Bench Creative Writing—1257
EQ-Bench 41075—
LiveBench Language—51.4%

Frequently asked questions

Is Grok 4.3 better than QwQ-32B?

Grok 4.3 is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.8 to 39.8 on the Noometry Index.

Is Grok 4.3 or QwQ-32B better for coding?

Grok 4.3 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 41.6 versus 35.4 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Grok 4.3 and QwQ-32B share?

22 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok 4.3 has 40 scored results on Noometry and QwQ-32B has 36.

Related comparisons

Go deeper