Noometry

Model comparison

Mistral Small 3.1 vs QwQ-32B

QwQ-32B is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.4 to 31.4 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 22 shared benchmarks.

Mistral Small 3.1 Mistral AI

31.4

Rank #263 Confirmed

QwQ-32B Alibaba (Qwen)

39.4

Rank #153 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 22 benchmarks with published results for both. Mistral Small 3.1 scores higher in 1 category and QwQ-32B in 7 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where QwQ-32B leads 36.2 to 13.7.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 3.9% for Mistral Small 3.1 and 59.2% for QwQ-32B.

Side by side

Mistral Small 3.1QwQ-32B
ProviderMistral AIAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index31.439.4
Released2025-03-172024-11-28
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window128K—
Max output102K—
Input $ / M tokens$0.35—
Output $ / M tokens$0.56—
Results tracked2836

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

Category by category

Coding Mistral Small 3.1 leads

Mistral Small 3.1: 37.7 (#175), QwQ-32B: 34.9 (#220)

BenchmarkMistral Small 3.1QwQ-32B
LMArena Coding13091333
Aider Polyglot—20.9%
BigCodeBench Instruct—44.6%
LiveBench Coding—72.2%
BigCodeBench Complete—54.4%

Reasoning QwQ-32B leads

Mistral Small 3.1: 18.9 (#249), QwQ-32B: 22.9 (#171)

BenchmarkMistral Small 3.1QwQ-32B
Chess Puzzles1%5%
LMArena Hard Prompts12781326
Epoch Capabilities Index127.48137.6
LiveBench Reasoning—83.5%
LiveBench Data Analysis—65%
ForecastBench—58.3
LiveBench—72%

Math QwQ-32B leads

Mistral Small 3.1: 13.7 (#295), QwQ-32B: 36.2 (#123)

BenchmarkMistral Small 3.1QwQ-32B
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-20253.9%59.2%
LMArena Math12611359
Omni-MATH24.8%—
LiveBench Math—77.8%

Knowledge QwQ-32B leads

Mistral Small 3.1: 22.6 (#266), QwQ-32B: 37.2 (#150)

BenchmarkMistral Small 3.1QwQ-32B
GPQA Diamond41.9%65.3%
LMArena Expert12581323
MMLU-Pro61%—
Confabulations—15.6%
GPQA (HELM)39.2%—

Multimodal Not comparable

Mistral Small 3.1: 32.6 (#93), QwQ-32B: —

BenchmarkMistral Small 3.1QwQ-32B
LMArena Vision1136—

Multilingual QwQ-32B leads

Mistral Small 3.1: 41.4 (#204), QwQ-32B: 45.0 (#171)

BenchmarkMistral Small 3.1QwQ-32B
LMArena Non-English12551306
LMArena Chinese12541378
LMArena French12701337
LMArena German12661313
LMArena Japanese12101263
LMArena Korean12061278
LMArena Russian12631297
LMArena Spanish12831353

Instruction Following QwQ-32B leads

Mistral Small 3.1: 63.8 (#225), QwQ-32B: 72.8 (#131)

BenchmarkMistral Small 3.1QwQ-32B
LMArena Instruction Following12641297
LiveBench Instruction Following—81.8%
IFEval75%—

Long Context QwQ-32B leads

Mistral Small 3.1: 39.5 (#172), QwQ-32B: 49.0 (#11)

BenchmarkMistral Small 3.1QwQ-32B
LMArena Longer Query13001308
Fiction.LiveBench—83.3%

Writing & Preference QwQ-32B leads

Mistral Small 3.1: 37.2 (#254), QwQ-32B: 50.9 (#175)

BenchmarkMistral Small 3.1QwQ-32B
LMArena Text12781329
LMArena Creative Writing12531288
EQ-Bench Creative Writing7611257
LMArena Multi-Turn12701314
Short-Story Creative Writing—80.2%
WildBench78.8%—
LiveBench Language—51.4%

Frequently asked questions

Is Mistral Small 3.1 better than QwQ-32B?

QwQ-32B is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.4 to 31.4 on the Noometry Index.

Is Mistral Small 3.1 or QwQ-32B better for coding?

Mistral Small 3.1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 37.7 versus 34.9 in the Noometry coding category.

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

22 benchmarks have published results for both models. Mistral Small 3.1 has 28 scored results on Noometry and QwQ-32B has 36.

Related comparisons

Go deeper