Model comparison

Magistral Small vs QwQ-32B

QwQ-32B is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.8 to 30.2 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 4 shared benchmarks.

Magistral Small Mistral AI

30.2

Rank #296 Confirmed

QwQ-32B Alibaba (Qwen)

39.8

Rank #159 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 4 benchmarks with published results for both. Magistral Small scores higher in 1 category and QwQ-32B in 3 categories; 4 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where QwQ-32B leads 23.7 to 6.8.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 30% for Magistral Small and 59.2% for QwQ-32B.

Side by side

Magistral Small and QwQ-32B specifications
Magistral SmallQwQ-32B
ProviderMistral AIAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index30.239.8
Released2025-06-102024-11-28
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window128K—
Max output40K—
Input $ / M tokens$0.50—
Output $ / M tokens$1.50—
Results tracked1036

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

Category by category

Coding Magistral Small leads

Magistral Small: 38.4 (#176), QwQ-32B: 35.4 (#226)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkMagistral SmallQwQ-32B
Aider Polyglot—20.9%
SciCode35.2%—
BigCodeBench Instruct—44.6%
LiveBench Coding—72.2%
LMArena Coding—1333
BigCodeBench Complete—54.4%

Reasoning QwQ-32B leads

Magistral Small: 6.8 (#350), QwQ-32B: 23.7 (#174)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkMagistral SmallQwQ-32B
Chess Puzzles3%5%
Epoch Capabilities Index133.19137.6
ARC-AGI-20%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark6.3%—
ARC-AGI-15%—
CritPt0.3%—
LiveBench Reasoning—83.5%
LMArena Hard Prompts—1325
DTBench61.3%—
LiveBench Data Analysis—65%
ForecastBench—58.3
LiveBench—72%

Math QwQ-32B leads

Magistral Small: 26.2 (#261), QwQ-32B: 38.0 (#143)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkMagistral SmallQwQ-32B
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202530%59.2%
LiveBench Math—77.8%
LMArena Math—1359

Knowledge QwQ-32B leads

Magistral Small: 30.9 (#223), QwQ-32B: 37.2 (#158)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkMagistral SmallQwQ-32B
GPQA Diamond56.1%65.3%
Confabulations—15.6%
LMArena Expert—1324

Multilingual Not comparable

Magistral Small: —, QwQ-32B: 44.8 (#176)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkMagistral SmallQwQ-32B
LMArena Non-English—1305
LMArena Chinese—1378
LMArena French—1336
LMArena German—1313
LMArena Japanese—1262
LMArena Korean—1279
LMArena Russian—1297
LMArena Spanish—1354

Instruction Following Not comparable

Magistral Small: —, QwQ-32B: 72.6 (#137)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkMagistral SmallQwQ-32B
LiveBench Instruction Following—81.8%
LMArena Instruction Following—1297

Long Context Not comparable

Magistral Small: —, QwQ-32B: 49.0 (#11)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkMagistral SmallQwQ-32B
Fiction.LiveBench—83.3%
LMArena Longer Query—1308

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Magistral Small: —, QwQ-32B: 50.6 (#180)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkMagistral SmallQwQ-32B
LMArena Text—1329
LMArena Creative Writing—1288
Short-Story Creative Writing—80.2%
EQ-Bench Creative Writing—1257
LMArena Multi-Turn—1314
LiveBench Language—51.4%

Frequently asked questions

Is Magistral Small better than QwQ-32B?

QwQ-32B is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.8 to 30.2 on the Noometry Index.

Is Magistral Small or QwQ-32B better for coding?

Magistral Small scores higher on coding benchmarks: 38.4 versus 35.4 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Magistral Small and QwQ-32B share?

4 benchmarks have published results for both models. Magistral Small has 10 scored results on Noometry and QwQ-32B has 36.

Related comparisons

Go deeper