Model comparison
Qwen1.5-7B vs QwQ-32B
QwQ-32B is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.4 to 30.8 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 12 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. Qwen1.5-7B 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 50.9 to 29.8.
Side by side
| Qwen1.5-7B | QwQ-32B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 30.8 | 39.4 |
| Released | 2024-02-04 | 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
Qwen1.5-7B: 31.6 (#271), QwQ-32B: 34.9 (#220)
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-7B | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1107 | 1333 |
| Aider Polyglot | — | 20.9% |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 44.6% |
| LiveBench Coding | — | 72.2% |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 54.4% |
Reasoning QwQ-32B leads
Qwen1.5-7B: 19.5 (#237), QwQ-32B: 22.9 (#171)
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-7B | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1066 | 1326 |
| 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
Qwen1.5-7B: 29.0 (#222), QwQ-32B: 36.2 (#123)
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-7B | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1080 | 1359 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 59.2% |
| LiveBench Math | — | 77.8% |
Knowledge QwQ-32B leads
Qwen1.5-7B: 28.2 (#239), QwQ-32B: 37.2 (#150)
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-7B | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1055 | 1323 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 65.3% |
| Confabulations | — | 15.6% |
| MMLU | 62.6% | — |
Multilingual QwQ-32B leads
Qwen1.5-7B: 28.6 (#266), QwQ-32B: 45.0 (#171)
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-7B | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1058 | 1306 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1140 | 1378 |
| LMArena Russian | 1006 | 1297 |
| LMArena French | — | 1337 |
| LMArena German | — | 1313 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1263 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1278 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1353 |
Instruction Following QwQ-32B leads
Qwen1.5-7B: 54.4 (#276), QwQ-32B: 72.8 (#131)
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-7B | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1058 | 1297 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | — | 81.8% |
Long Context QwQ-32B leads
Qwen1.5-7B: 33.1 (#261), QwQ-32B: 49.0 (#11)
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-7B | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1090 | 1308 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 83.3% |
Writing & Preference QwQ-32B leads
Qwen1.5-7B: 29.8 (#288), QwQ-32B: 50.9 (#175)
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-7B | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1084 | 1329 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1035 | 1288 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1061 | 1314 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | — | 80.2% |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 1257 |
| LiveBench Language | — | 51.4% |
Frequently asked questions
Is Qwen1.5-7B better than QwQ-32B?
QwQ-32B is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.4 to 30.8 on the Noometry Index.
Is Qwen1.5-7B or QwQ-32B better for coding?
QwQ-32B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 34.9 versus 31.6 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Qwen1.5-7B and QwQ-32B share?
12 benchmarks have published results for both models. Qwen1.5-7B has 13 scored results on Noometry and QwQ-32B has 36.