Model comparison

Qwen1.5-32B vs Qwen3.5 Plus

Qwen3.5 Plus is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.3 to 30.0 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 1 shared benchmarks.

Qwen1.5-32B Alibaba (Qwen)

30.0

Rank #288 Confirmed

Qwen3.5 Plus Alibaba (Qwen)

42.3

Rank #103 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 1 benchmark with published results for both. Qwen1.5-32B scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3.5 Plus in 4 categories; 4 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen3.5 Plus leads 46.0 to 13.5.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is GPQA Diamond: 30.7% for Qwen1.5-32B and 84.8% for Qwen3.5 Plus.
  • Qwen1.5-32B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Qwen1.5-32B and Qwen3.5 Plus specifications
Qwen1.5-32BQwen3.5 Plus
ProviderAlibaba (Qwen)Alibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index30.042.3
Released2024-02-042026-02-16
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window—1M
Max output—66K
Input $ / M tokens—$0.40
Output $ / M tokens—$2.40
Results tracked2115

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

Category by category

Coding Not comparable

Qwen1.5-32B: 31.1 (#278), Qwen3.5 Plus: —

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen1.5-32BQwen3.5 Plus
BigCodeBench Instruct32.3%—
LMArena Coding1155—
BigCodeBench Complete42%—
ALE-Bench—621.92

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Qwen1.5-32B: —, Qwen3.5 Plus: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen1.5-32BQwen3.5 Plus
Vending-Bench 2—0.54

Reasoning Qwen3.5 Plus leads

Qwen1.5-32B: 20.9 (#210), Qwen3.5 Plus: 32.0 (#67)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen1.5-32BQwen3.5 Plus
Chess Puzzles—22%
LMArena Hard Prompts1131—
Mystery Game Puzzles—17%
DTBench—80.5%
LMCA—36.4%
Epoch Capabilities Index—146.79

Math Qwen3.5 Plus leads

Qwen1.5-32B: 30.5 (#207), Qwen3.5 Plus: 47.9 (#55)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen1.5-32BQwen3.5 Plus
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—86.7%
LMArena Math1155—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)—21%
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)—2.1%

Knowledge Qwen3.5 Plus leads

Qwen1.5-32B: 13.5 (#291), Qwen3.5 Plus: 46.0 (#78)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen1.5-32BQwen3.5 Plus
GPQA Diamond30.7%84.8%
SimpleQA Verified—25.4%
Vectara Hallucination Rate—10.7%
LMArena Expert1126—
MMLU74.4%—

Multilingual Not comparable

Qwen1.5-32B: 31.6 (#254), Qwen3.5 Plus: —

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen1.5-32BQwen3.5 Plus
LMArena Non-English1106—
LMArena Chinese1176—
LMArena French1100—
LMArena German1058—
LMArena Japanese1027—
LMArena Korean1007—
LMArena Russian1073—
LMArena Spanish1089—

Instruction Following Not comparable

Qwen1.5-32B: 58.0 (#260), Qwen3.5 Plus: —

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen1.5-32BQwen3.5 Plus
LMArena Instruction Following1116—

Long Context Qwen3.5 Plus leads

Qwen1.5-32B: 34.7 (#241), Qwen3.5 Plus: 42.9 (#109)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen1.5-32BQwen3.5 Plus
CL-bench—19.8%
CL-bench Life—12.4%
LMArena Longer Query1146—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Qwen1.5-32B: 34.4 (#266), Qwen3.5 Plus: —

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen1.5-32BQwen3.5 Plus
LMArena Text1137—
LMArena Creative Writing1083—
LMArena Multi-Turn1140—

Frequently asked questions

Is Qwen1.5-32B better than Qwen3.5 Plus?

Qwen3.5 Plus is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.3 to 30.0 on the Noometry Index.

How many benchmarks do Qwen1.5-32B and Qwen3.5 Plus share?

1 benchmark has published results for both models. Qwen1.5-32B has 21 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.5 Plus has 15.

Related comparisons

Go deeper