Model comparison

Qwen Max vs Qwen1.5-32B

Qwen Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 34.7 to 30.5 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 18 shared benchmarks.

Qwen Max Alibaba (Qwen)

34.7

Rank #230 Confirmed

Qwen1.5-32B Alibaba (Qwen)

30.5

Rank #293 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 18 benchmarks with published results for both. Qwen Max scores higher in 6 categories and Qwen1.5-32B in 2 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen Max leads 30.3 to 13.5.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is GPQA Diamond: 56.1% for Qwen Max and 30.7% for Qwen1.5-32B.
  • Qwen1.5-32B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Qwen Max and Qwen1.5-32B specifications
Qwen MaxQwen1.5-32B
ProviderAlibaba (Qwen)Alibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index34.730.5
Released2024-04-032024-02-04
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window33K—
Max output8K—
Input $ / M tokens$1.60—
Output $ / M tokens$6.40—
Results tracked2321

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

Category by category

Coding Too close to call

Qwen Max: 30.7 (#292), Qwen1.5-32B: 31.7 (#282)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen MaxQwen1.5-32B
LMArena Coding12881155
Aider Polyglot21.8%—
BigCodeBench Instruct—32.3%
BigCodeBench Complete—42%

Reasoning Qwen Max leads

Qwen Max: 25.1 (#151), Qwen1.5-32B: 21.8 (#212)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen MaxQwen1.5-32B
LMArena Hard Prompts12691130

Math Qwen1.5-32B leads

Qwen Max: 22.3 (#276), Qwen1.5-32B: 33.0 (#207)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen MaxQwen1.5-32B
LMArena Math12751155
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202516.1%—
MATH Level 567.2%—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)1%—

Knowledge Qwen Max leads

Qwen Max: 30.3 (#228), Qwen1.5-32B: 13.5 (#296)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen MaxQwen1.5-32B
GPQA Diamond56.1%30.7%
LMArena Expert12481126
MMLU—74.4%

Multilingual Qwen Max leads

Qwen Max: 41.8 (#202), Qwen1.5-32B: 31.4 (#259)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen MaxQwen1.5-32B
LMArena Non-English12631106
LMArena Chinese12541177
LMArena French13301101
LMArena German12541058
LMArena Japanese12051027
LMArena Korean11421008
LMArena Russian12741073
LMArena Spanish12901089

Instruction Following Qwen Max leads

Qwen Max: 66.5 (#208), Qwen1.5-32B: 57.7 (#265)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen MaxQwen1.5-32B
LMArena Instruction Following12621116

Long Context Qwen Max leads

Qwen Max: 39.4 (#180), Qwen1.5-32B: 34.7 (#246)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen MaxQwen1.5-32B
LMArena Longer Query12881146
Fiction.LiveBench66.7%—

Writing & Preference Qwen Max leads

Qwen Max: 47.8 (#205), Qwen1.5-32B: 34.2 (#271)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen MaxQwen1.5-32B
LMArena Text12821137
LMArena Creative Writing12481083
LMArena Multi-Turn12771140

Frequently asked questions

Is Qwen Max better than Qwen1.5-32B?

Qwen Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 34.7 to 30.5 on the Noometry Index.

Is Qwen Max or Qwen1.5-32B better for coding?

They score almost the same on coding (30.7 vs 31.7); test both on your own repository before choosing.

How many benchmarks do Qwen Max and Qwen1.5-32B share?

18 benchmarks have published results for both models. Qwen Max has 23 scored results on Noometry and Qwen1.5-32B has 21.

Related comparisons

Go deeper