Model comparison
Phi-4 Mini vs QwQ-32B
QwQ-32B is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.4 to 30.4 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.
Microsoft
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where QwQ-32B leads 37.2 to 24.8.
Side by side
| Phi-4 Mini | QwQ-32B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Microsoft | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 30.4 | 39.4 |
| Released | 2024-12-11 | 2024-11-28 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 128K | — |
| Max output | 4K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.075 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.30 | — |
| Results tracked | 3 | 36 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding QwQ-32B leads
Phi-4 Mini: 27.6 (#312), QwQ-32B: 34.9 (#220)
| Benchmark | Phi-4 Mini | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| Aider Polyglot | — | 20.9% |
| SciCode | 10.8% | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 44.6% |
| LiveBench Coding | — | 72.2% |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1333 |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 54.4% |
Reasoning QwQ-32B leads
Phi-4 Mini: 21.7 (#190), QwQ-32B: 22.9 (#171)
| Benchmark | Phi-4 Mini | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| CritPt | 0% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 5% |
| LiveBench Reasoning | — | 83.5% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1326 |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | — | 65% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 137.6 |
| ForecastBench | — | 58.3 |
| LiveBench | — | 72% |
Math Not comparable
Phi-4 Mini: —, QwQ-32B: 36.2 (#123)
| Benchmark | Phi-4 Mini | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 59.2% |
| LiveBench Math | — | 77.8% |
| LMArena Math | — | 1359 |
Knowledge QwQ-32B leads
Phi-4 Mini: 24.8 (#261), QwQ-32B: 37.2 (#150)
| Benchmark | Phi-4 Mini | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 65.3% |
| Confabulations | — | 15.6% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 23.5% | — |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1323 |
Multilingual Not comparable
Phi-4 Mini: —, QwQ-32B: 45.0 (#171)
| Benchmark | Phi-4 Mini | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1306 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1378 |
| LMArena French | — | 1337 |
| LMArena German | — | 1313 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1263 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1278 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1297 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1353 |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Phi-4 Mini: —, QwQ-32B: 72.8 (#131)
| Benchmark | Phi-4 Mini | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Instruction Following | — | 81.8% |
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1297 |
Long Context Not comparable
Phi-4 Mini: —, QwQ-32B: 49.0 (#11)
| Benchmark | Phi-4 Mini | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 83.3% |
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1308 |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Phi-4 Mini: —, QwQ-32B: 50.9 (#175)
| Benchmark | Phi-4 Mini | QwQ-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 Phi-4 Mini better than QwQ-32B?
QwQ-32B is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.4 to 30.4 on the Noometry Index.
Is Phi-4 Mini or QwQ-32B better for coding?
QwQ-32B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 34.9 versus 27.6 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Phi-4 Mini and QwQ-32B share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Phi-4 Mini has 3 scored results on Noometry and QwQ-32B has 36.