Model comparison
Qwen1.5 4b Chat vs QwQ-32B
QwQ-32B is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.8 to 28.8 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 13 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 13 benchmarks with published results for both. Qwen1.5 4b Chat scores higher in 0 categories and QwQ-32B in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where QwQ-32B leads 50.6 to 23.8.
Side by side
| Qwen1.5 4b Chat | QwQ-32B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 28.8 | 39.8 |
| Released | — | 2024-11-28 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | — | — |
| Max output | — | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Results tracked | 13 | 36 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding QwQ-32B leads
Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 29.1 (#308), QwQ-32B: 35.4 (#226)
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5 4b Chat | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 999 | 1333 |
| Aider Polyglot | — | 20.9% |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 44.6% |
| LiveBench Coding | — | 72.2% |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 54.4% |
Reasoning QwQ-32B leads
Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 18.5 (#279), QwQ-32B: 23.7 (#174)
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5 4b Chat | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 976 | 1325 |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 5% |
| LiveBench Reasoning | — | 83.5% |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | — | 65% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 137.6 |
| ForecastBench | — | 58.3 |
| LiveBench | — | 72% |
Math QwQ-32B leads
Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 30.4 (#234), QwQ-32B: 38.0 (#143)
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5 4b Chat | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1026 | 1359 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 59.2% |
| LiveBench Math | — | 77.8% |
Knowledge QwQ-32B leads
Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 26.7 (#255), QwQ-32B: 37.2 (#158)
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5 4b Chat | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 980 | 1324 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 65.3% |
| Confabulations | — | 15.6% |
Multilingual QwQ-32B leads
Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 24.1 (#290), QwQ-32B: 44.8 (#176)
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5 4b Chat | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 979 | 1305 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1024 | 1378 |
| LMArena German | 902 | 1313 |
| LMArena Russian | 952 | 1297 |
| LMArena French | — | 1336 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1262 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1279 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1354 |
Instruction Following QwQ-32B leads
Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 49.0 (#300), QwQ-32B: 72.6 (#137)
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5 4b Chat | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 978 | 1297 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | — | 81.8% |
Long Context QwQ-32B leads
Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 30.1 (#290), QwQ-32B: 49.0 (#11)
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5 4b Chat | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 988 | 1308 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 83.3% |
Writing & Preference QwQ-32B leads
Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 23.8 (#309), QwQ-32B: 50.6 (#180)
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5 4b Chat | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 997 | 1329 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 969 | 1288 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 977 | 1314 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | — | 80.2% |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 1257 |
| LiveBench Language | — | 51.4% |
Frequently asked questions
Is Qwen1.5 4b Chat better than QwQ-32B?
QwQ-32B is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.8 to 28.8 on the Noometry Index.
Is Qwen1.5 4b Chat or QwQ-32B better for coding?
QwQ-32B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 35.4 versus 29.1 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Qwen1.5 4b Chat and QwQ-32B share?
13 benchmarks have published results for both models. Qwen1.5 4b Chat has 13 scored results on Noometry and QwQ-32B has 36.