Model comparison

Mistral Nemo vs Qwen3 32B

Qwen3 32B is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.2 to 26.4 on the Noometry Index. Mistral Nemo costs 8.2× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3 32B's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified October 10, 2026. 4 shared benchmarks.

Mistral Nemo

Mistral AI

26.4

Rank #337 Confirmed

Qwen3 32B

Alibaba (Qwen)

39.2

Rank #172 Confirmed

Summary

They share 4 benchmarks with published results for both. Mistral Nemo scores higher in 1 category and Qwen3 32B in 4 categories; 4 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen3 32B leads 40.0 to 12.3.
The biggest single-benchmark swing is GPQA Diamond: 29.9% for Mistral Nemo and 65.7% for Qwen3 32B.
Mistral Nemo is cheaper at $0.15 / $0.15 per million input/output tokens, against $0.70 / $2.80 for Qwen3 32B.
Qwen3 32B accepts more context: 131K tokens versus 128K.

Side by side

Mistral Nemo and Qwen3 32B specifications
	Mistral Nemo	Qwen3 32B
Provider	Mistral AI	Alibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index	26.4	39.2
Released	2024-07-01	2025-04
Weights	Open	Open
Context window	128K	131K
Max output	128K	16K
Input $ / M tokens	$0.15	$0.70
Output $ / M tokens	$0.15	$2.80
Results tracked	10	26

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

Category by category

Coding Not comparable

Mistral Nemo: —, Qwen3 32B: 37.7 (#190)

Coding benchmarks
Benchmark	Mistral Nemo	Qwen3 32B
Aider Polyglot	—	40%
SciCode	—	35.4%
LMArena Coding	—	1358

Agentic & Tool Use Qwen3 32B leads

Mistral Nemo: 23.5 (#125), Qwen3 32B: 32.6 (#62)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
Benchmark	Mistral Nemo	Qwen3 32B
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard	27.6%	48.7%
BALROG	17.6%	—

Reasoning Too close to call

Mistral Nemo: 20.7 (#232), Qwen3 32B: 20.2 (#241)

Reasoning benchmarks
Benchmark	Mistral Nemo	Qwen3 32B
DTBench	48.6%	67.5%
Epoch Capabilities Index	118.68	138.51
Kagi LLM Benchmark	—	54.9%
CritPt	—	0.3%
Chess Puzzles	—	5%
LMArena Hard Prompts	—	1334
LMCA	—	17.3%
PIQA	83.5%	—

Math Qwen3 32B leads

Mistral Nemo: 25.5 (#268), Qwen3 32B: 39.7 (#99)

Math benchmarks
Benchmark	Mistral Nemo	Qwen3 32B
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025	—	66.9%
LMArena Math	—	1399
MATH Level 5	10.8%	—
GSM8K	84.2%	—

Knowledge Qwen3 32B leads

Mistral Nemo: 12.3 (#298), Qwen3 32B: 40.0 (#125)

Knowledge benchmarks
Benchmark	Mistral Nemo	Qwen3 32B
GPQA Diamond	29.9%	65.7%
Vectara Hallucination Rate	—	5.9%
LMArena Expert	—	1362
BoolQ	82.5%	—

Multilingual Not comparable

Mistral Nemo: —, Qwen3 32B: 45.6 (#167)

Multilingual benchmarks
Benchmark	Mistral Nemo	Qwen3 32B
LMArena Non-English	—	1317
LMArena Chinese	—	1357
LMArena German	—	1341
LMArena Russian	—	1311

Instruction Following Not comparable

Mistral Nemo: —, Qwen3 32B: 68.9 (#179)

Instruction Following benchmarks
Benchmark	Mistral Nemo	Qwen3 32B
LMArena Instruction Following	—	1305

Long Context Not comparable

Mistral Nemo: —, Qwen3 32B: 43.8 (#87)

Long Context benchmarks
Benchmark	Mistral Nemo	Qwen3 32B
Fiction.LiveBench	—	74.2%
LMArena Longer Query	—	1327

Writing & Preference Qwen3 32B leads

Mistral Nemo: 28.5 (#296), Qwen3 32B: 52.9 (#163)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
Benchmark	Mistral Nemo	Qwen3 32B
LMArena Text	—	1340
LMArena Creative Writing	—	1297
EQ-Bench Creative Writing	881	—
LMArena Multi-Turn	—	1331

Frequently asked questions

Is Mistral Nemo better than Qwen3 32B?

Which is cheaper, Mistral Nemo or Qwen3 32B?

Mistral Nemo is cheaper. It lists at $0.15 per million input tokens and $0.15 per million output tokens; Qwen3 32B lists at $0.70 and $2.80.

Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen3 32B does, with 131K tokens against 128K.

How many benchmarks do Mistral Nemo and Qwen3 32B share?

4 benchmarks have published results for both models. Mistral Nemo has 10 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3 32B has 26.