Model comparison
o1-pro vs Qwen3 32B
Qwen3 32B is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.2 to 31.5 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen3 32B leads 40.0 to 29.7.
- Qwen3 32B is cheaper at $0.70 / $2.80 per million input/output tokens, against $150 / $600 for o1-pro.
- o1-pro accepts more context: 200K tokens versus 131K.
- Qwen3 32B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| o1-pro | Qwen3 32B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenAI | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 31.5 | 39.2 |
| Released | 2025-03-19 | 2025-04 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 200K | 131K |
| Max output | 100K | 16K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $150 | $0.70 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $600 | $2.80 |
| Results tracked | 3 | 26 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Not comparable
o1-pro: —, Qwen3 32B: 37.7 (#190)
| Benchmark | o1-pro | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| Aider Polyglot | — | 40% |
| SciCode | — | 35.4% |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1358 |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
o1-pro: —, Qwen3 32B: 32.6 (#62)
| Benchmark | o1-pro | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 48.7% |
Reasoning Too close to call
o1-pro: 20.4 (#239), Qwen3 32B: 20.2 (#241)
| Benchmark | o1-pro | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 54.9% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 23.3% | — |
| CritPt | — | 0.3% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 5% |
| EnigmaEval | 6.1% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1334 |
| DTBench | — | 67.5% |
| LMCA | — | 17.3% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 138.51 |
Math Not comparable
o1-pro: —, Qwen3 32B: 39.7 (#99)
| Benchmark | o1-pro | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 66.9% |
| LMArena Math | — | 1399 |
Knowledge Qwen3 32B leads
o1-pro: 29.7 (#234), Qwen3 32B: 40.0 (#125)
| Benchmark | o1-pro | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 65.7% |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 8.1% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 5.9% |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1362 |
Multilingual Not comparable
o1-pro: —, Qwen3 32B: 45.6 (#167)
| Benchmark | o1-pro | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1317 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1357 |
| LMArena German | — | 1341 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1311 |
Instruction Following Not comparable
o1-pro: —, Qwen3 32B: 68.9 (#179)
| Benchmark | o1-pro | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1305 |
Long Context Not comparable
o1-pro: —, Qwen3 32B: 43.8 (#87)
| Benchmark | o1-pro | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 74.2% |
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1327 |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
o1-pro: —, Qwen3 32B: 52.9 (#163)
| Benchmark | o1-pro | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1340 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1297 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1331 |
Frequently asked questions
Is o1-pro better than Qwen3 32B?
Qwen3 32B is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.2 to 31.5 on the Noometry Index.
Which is cheaper, o1-pro or Qwen3 32B?
Qwen3 32B is cheaper. It lists at $0.70 per million input tokens and $2.80 per million output tokens; o1-pro lists at $150 and $600.
Which has the bigger context window?
o1-pro does, with 200K tokens against 131K.
How many benchmarks do o1-pro and Qwen3 32B share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. o1-pro has 3 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3 32B has 26.