Noometry

Model comparison

Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct vs QwQ-32B

QwQ-32B is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.4 to 30.3 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 32 shared benchmarks.

Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct Meta

30.3

Rank #283 Confirmed

QwQ-32B Alibaba (Qwen)

39.4

Rank #153 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 32 benchmarks with published results for both. Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct scores higher in 0 categories and QwQ-32B in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in long context, where QwQ-32B leads 49.0 to 26.4.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 5.1% for Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct and 59.2% for QwQ-32B.

Side by side

Llama-3.3-70B-InstructQwQ-32B
ProviderMetaAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index30.339.4
Released2024-12-062024-11-28
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window128K—
Max output4K—
Input $ / M tokens$0.10—
Output $ / M tokens$0.32—
Results tracked4336

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

Category by category

Coding QwQ-32B leads

Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct: 30.6 (#284), QwQ-32B: 34.9 (#220)

BenchmarkLlama-3.3-70B-InstructQwQ-32B
BigCodeBench Instruct46.9%44.6%
LiveBench Coding36.6%72.2%
LMArena Coding12681333
BigCodeBench Complete57.5%54.4%
Aider Polyglot—20.9%
SciCode26%—
WeirdML14.4%—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct: 25.6 (#100), QwQ-32B: —

BenchmarkLlama-3.3-70B-InstructQwQ-32B
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard31.9%—
BALROG23%—

Reasoning QwQ-32B leads

Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct: 13.7 (#325), QwQ-32B: 22.9 (#171)

BenchmarkLlama-3.3-70B-InstructQwQ-32B
LiveBench Reasoning50.8%83.5%
LMArena Hard Prompts12571326
LiveBench Data Analysis49.5%65%
Epoch Capabilities Index127.32137.6
ForecastBench58.658.3
LiveBench50.2%72%
SimpleBench19.9%—
CritPt0%—
Chess Puzzles—5%
DTBench59.5%—
LMCA17.5%—

Math QwQ-32B leads

Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct: 14.3 (#292), QwQ-32B: 36.2 (#123)

BenchmarkLlama-3.3-70B-InstructQwQ-32B
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-20255.1%59.2%
LiveBench Math42.2%77.8%
LMArena Math12681359
MATH Level 541.6%—

Knowledge QwQ-32B leads

Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct: 30.5 (#220), QwQ-32B: 37.2 (#150)

BenchmarkLlama-3.3-70B-InstructQwQ-32B
GPQA Diamond47.4%65.3%
Confabulations22.8%15.6%
LMArena Expert12251323
Vectara Hallucination Rate4.1%—
MMLU86.3%—

Multilingual QwQ-32B leads

Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct: 40.1 (#215), QwQ-32B: 45.0 (#171)

BenchmarkLlama-3.3-70B-InstructQwQ-32B
LMArena Non-English12361306
LMArena Chinese12171378
LMArena French12801337
LMArena German12511313
LMArena Japanese11491263
LMArena Korean11421278
LMArena Russian12521297
LMArena Spanish12691353

Instruction Following QwQ-32B leads

Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct: 71.3 (#152), QwQ-32B: 72.8 (#131)

BenchmarkLlama-3.3-70B-InstructQwQ-32B
LiveBench Instruction Following82.7%81.8%
LMArena Instruction Following12421297

Long Context QwQ-32B leads

Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct: 26.4 (#290), QwQ-32B: 49.0 (#11)

BenchmarkLlama-3.3-70B-InstructQwQ-32B
Fiction.LiveBench33.3%83.3%
LMArena Longer Query12561308

Writing & Preference QwQ-32B leads

Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct: 47.8 (#203), QwQ-32B: 50.9 (#175)

BenchmarkLlama-3.3-70B-InstructQwQ-32B
LMArena Text12741329
LMArena Creative Writing12501288
LMArena Multi-Turn12791314
LiveBench Language39.2%51.4%
Short-Story Creative Writing—80.2%
EQ-Bench Creative Writing—1257

Frequently asked questions

Is Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct better than QwQ-32B?

QwQ-32B is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.4 to 30.3 on the Noometry Index.

Is Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct or QwQ-32B better for coding?

QwQ-32B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 34.9 versus 30.6 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct and QwQ-32B share?

32 benchmarks have published results for both models. Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct has 43 scored results on Noometry and QwQ-32B has 36.

Related comparisons

Go deeper