Model comparison

Mistral Medium 3.1 vs QwQ-32B

QwQ-32B is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.8 to 31.9 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 1 shared benchmarks.

Mistral Medium 3.1 Mistral AI

31.9

Rank #266 Reported

QwQ-32B Alibaba (Qwen)

39.8

Rank #159 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 1 benchmark with published results for both. Mistral Medium 3.1 scores higher in 1 category and QwQ-32B in 1 category; 2 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where QwQ-32B leads 23.7 to 10.6.
  • QwQ-32B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Mistral Medium 3.1 and QwQ-32B specifications
Mistral Medium 3.1QwQ-32B
ProviderMistral AIAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index31.939.8
Released—2024-11-28
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window131K—
Max output105K—
Input $ / M tokens$0.40—
Output $ / M tokens$2—
Results tracked336

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

Category by category

Coding Not comparable

Mistral Medium 3.1: —, QwQ-32B: 35.4 (#226)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkMistral Medium 3.1QwQ-32B
Aider Polyglot—20.9%
BigCodeBench Instruct—44.6%
LiveBench Coding—72.2%
LMArena Coding—1333
BigCodeBench Complete—54.4%

Reasoning QwQ-32B leads

Mistral Medium 3.1: 10.6 (#341), QwQ-32B: 23.7 (#174)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkMistral Medium 3.1QwQ-32B
NYT Connections (extended)6.5%—
Chess Puzzles—5%
Thematic Generalization20.3%—
LiveBench Reasoning—83.5%
LMArena Hard Prompts—1325
LiveBench Data Analysis—65%
Epoch Capabilities Index—137.6
ForecastBench—58.3
LiveBench—72%

Math Not comparable

Mistral Medium 3.1: —, QwQ-32B: 38.0 (#143)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkMistral Medium 3.1QwQ-32B
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—59.2%
LiveBench Math—77.8%
LMArena Math—1359

Knowledge Not comparable

Mistral Medium 3.1: —, QwQ-32B: 37.2 (#158)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkMistral Medium 3.1QwQ-32B
GPQA Diamond—65.3%
Confabulations—15.6%
LMArena Expert—1324

Multilingual Not comparable

Mistral Medium 3.1: —, QwQ-32B: 44.8 (#176)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkMistral Medium 3.1QwQ-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

Mistral Medium 3.1: —, QwQ-32B: 72.6 (#137)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkMistral Medium 3.1QwQ-32B
LiveBench Instruction Following—81.8%
LMArena Instruction Following—1297

Long Context Not comparable

Mistral Medium 3.1: —, QwQ-32B: 49.0 (#11)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkMistral Medium 3.1QwQ-32B
Fiction.LiveBench—83.3%
LMArena Longer Query—1308

Writing & Preference Mistral Medium 3.1 leads

Mistral Medium 3.1: 55.5 (#145), QwQ-32B: 50.6 (#180)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkMistral Medium 3.1QwQ-32B
EQ-Bench Creative Writing14761257
LMArena Text—1329
LMArena Creative Writing—1288
Short-Story Creative Writing—80.2%
LMArena Multi-Turn—1314
LiveBench Language—51.4%

Frequently asked questions

Is Mistral Medium 3.1 better than QwQ-32B?

QwQ-32B is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.8 to 31.9 on the Noometry Index.

How many benchmarks do Mistral Medium 3.1 and QwQ-32B share?

1 benchmark has published results for both models. Mistral Medium 3.1 has 3 scored results on Noometry and QwQ-32B has 36.

Related comparisons

Go deeper