Model comparison
Qwen3 32B vs Qwen3-4B
Qwen3 32B is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.2 to 31.9 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 5 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 5 benchmarks with published results for both. Qwen3 32B scores higher in 4 categories and Qwen3-4B in 0 categories; 3 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Qwen3 32B leads 39.7 to 29.7.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 66.9% for Qwen3 32B and 52.2% for Qwen3-4B.
Side by side
| Qwen3 32B | Qwen3-4B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 39.2 | 31.9 |
| Released | 2025-04 | 2025-04-29 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 131K | — |
| Max output | 16K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.70 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $2.80 | — |
| Results tracked | 26 | 6 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Not comparable
Qwen3 32B: 37.7 (#190), Qwen3-4B: —
| Benchmark | Qwen3 32B | Qwen3-4B |
|---|---|---|
| Aider Polyglot | 40% | — |
| SciCode | 35.4% | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1358 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Qwen3 32B leads
Qwen3 32B: 32.6 (#62), Qwen3-4B: 27.6 (#100)
| Benchmark | Qwen3 32B | Qwen3-4B |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 48.7% | 35.7% |
Reasoning Too close to call
Qwen3 32B: 20.2 (#241), Qwen3-4B: 19.2 (#268)
| Benchmark | Qwen3 32B | Qwen3-4B |
|---|---|---|
| Chess Puzzles | 5% | 4% |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 54.9% | — |
| CritPt | 0.3% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1334 | — |
| DTBench | 67.5% | — |
| LMCA | 17.3% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 138.51 | — |
Math Qwen3 32B leads
Qwen3 32B: 39.7 (#99), Qwen3-4B: 29.7 (#240)
| Benchmark | Qwen3 32B | Qwen3-4B |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 66.9% | 52.2% |
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | — | 38.5% |
| LMArena Math | 1399 | — |
Knowledge Qwen3 32B leads
Qwen3 32B: 40.0 (#125), Qwen3-4B: 33.0 (#208)
| Benchmark | Qwen3 32B | Qwen3-4B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 65.7% | 52.3% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 5.9% | 5.7% |
| LMArena Expert | 1362 | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
Qwen3 32B: 45.6 (#167), Qwen3-4B: —
| Benchmark | Qwen3 32B | Qwen3-4B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1317 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1357 | — |
| LMArena German | 1341 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1311 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Qwen3 32B: 68.9 (#179), Qwen3-4B: —
| Benchmark | Qwen3 32B | Qwen3-4B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1305 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
Qwen3 32B: 43.8 (#87), Qwen3-4B: —
| Benchmark | Qwen3 32B | Qwen3-4B |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | 74.2% | — |
| LMArena Longer Query | 1327 | — |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Qwen3 32B: 52.9 (#163), Qwen3-4B: —
| Benchmark | Qwen3 32B | Qwen3-4B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1340 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1297 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1331 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Qwen3 32B better than Qwen3-4B?
Qwen3 32B is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.2 to 31.9 on the Noometry Index.
How many benchmarks do Qwen3 32B and Qwen3-4B share?
5 benchmarks have published results for both models. Qwen3 32B has 26 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3-4B has 6.