Noometry

Model comparison

Qwen3 32B vs Qwen3.5 Plus

Qwen3.5 Plus is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.9 to 39.2 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 7 shared benchmarks.

Qwen3 32B Alibaba (Qwen)

39.2

Rank #172 Confirmed

Qwen3.5 Plus Alibaba (Qwen)

42.9

Rank #106 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 7 benchmarks with published results for both. Qwen3 32B scores higher in 1 category and Qwen3.5 Plus in 3 categories; 3 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where Qwen3.5 Plus leads 32.8 to 20.2.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 66.9% for Qwen3 32B and 86.7% for Qwen3.5 Plus.
  • Qwen3.5 Plus is cheaper at $0.40 / $2.40 per million input/output tokens, against $0.70 / $2.80 for Qwen3 32B.
  • Qwen3.5 Plus accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 131K.
  • Qwen3 32B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Qwen3 32BQwen3.5 Plus
ProviderAlibaba (Qwen)Alibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index39.242.9
Released2025-042026-02-16
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window131K1M
Max output16K66K
Input $ / M tokens$0.70$0.40
Output $ / M tokens$2.80$2.40
Results tracked2615

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

Category by category

Coding Not comparable

Qwen3 32B: 37.7 (#190), Qwen3.5 Plus: —

BenchmarkQwen3 32BQwen3.5 Plus
Aider Polyglot40%—
SciCode35.4%—
LMArena Coding1358—
ALE-Bench—621.92

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Qwen3 32B: 32.6 (#62), Qwen3.5 Plus: —

BenchmarkQwen3 32BQwen3.5 Plus
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard48.7%—
Vending-Bench 2—0.54

Reasoning Qwen3.5 Plus leads

Qwen3 32B: 20.2 (#241), Qwen3.5 Plus: 32.8 (#74)

BenchmarkQwen3 32BQwen3.5 Plus
Chess Puzzles5%22%
DTBench67.5%80.5%
LMCA17.3%36.4%
Epoch Capabilities Index138.51146.78
Kagi LLM Benchmark54.9%—
CritPt0.3%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1334—
Mystery Game Puzzles—17%

Math Qwen3.5 Plus leads

Qwen3 32B: 39.7 (#99), Qwen3.5 Plus: 49.6 (#61)

BenchmarkQwen3 32BQwen3.5 Plus
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202566.9%86.7%
LMArena Math1399—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)—21%
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)—2.1%

Knowledge Qwen3.5 Plus leads

Qwen3 32B: 40.0 (#125), Qwen3.5 Plus: 46.0 (#83)

BenchmarkQwen3 32BQwen3.5 Plus
GPQA Diamond65.7%84.8%
Vectara Hallucination Rate5.9%10.7%
SimpleQA Verified—25.4%
LMArena Expert1362—

Multilingual Not comparable

Qwen3 32B: 45.6 (#167), Qwen3.5 Plus: —

BenchmarkQwen3 32BQwen3.5 Plus
LMArena Non-English1317—
LMArena Chinese1357—
LMArena German1341—
LMArena Russian1311—

Instruction Following Not comparable

Qwen3 32B: 68.9 (#179), Qwen3.5 Plus: —

BenchmarkQwen3 32BQwen3.5 Plus
LMArena Instruction Following1305—

Long Context Too close to call

Qwen3 32B: 43.8 (#87), Qwen3.5 Plus: 43.0 (#113)

BenchmarkQwen3 32BQwen3.5 Plus
Fiction.LiveBench74.2%—
CL-bench—19.8%
CL-bench Life—12.4%
LMArena Longer Query1327—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Qwen3 32B: 52.9 (#163), Qwen3.5 Plus: —

BenchmarkQwen3 32BQwen3.5 Plus
LMArena Text1340—
LMArena Creative Writing1297—
LMArena Multi-Turn1331—

Frequently asked questions

Is Qwen3 32B better than Qwen3.5 Plus?

Qwen3.5 Plus is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.9 to 39.2 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, Qwen3 32B or Qwen3.5 Plus?

Qwen3.5 Plus is cheaper. It lists at $0.40 per million input tokens and $2.40 per million output tokens; Qwen3 32B lists at $0.70 and $2.80.

Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen3.5 Plus does, with 1M tokens against 131K.

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

7 benchmarks have published results for both models. Qwen3 32B has 26 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.5 Plus has 15.

Related comparisons

Go deeper