Model comparison

Qwen3-4B vs QwQ-32B

QwQ-32B is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.8 to 31.9 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 3 shared benchmarks.

Qwen3-4B Alibaba (Qwen)

31.9

Rank #264 Confirmed

QwQ-32B Alibaba (Qwen)

39.8

Rank #159 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 3 benchmarks with published results for both. Qwen3-4B scores higher in 0 categories and QwQ-32B in 3 categories; 3 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where QwQ-32B leads 38.0 to 29.7.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is GPQA Diamond: 52.3% for Qwen3-4B and 65.3% for QwQ-32B.

Side by side

Qwen3-4B and QwQ-32B specifications
Qwen3-4BQwQ-32B
ProviderAlibaba (Qwen)Alibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index31.939.8
Released2025-04-292024-11-28
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window——
Max output——
Input $ / M tokens——
Output $ / M tokens——
Results tracked636

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

Category by category

Coding Not comparable

Qwen3-4B: —, QwQ-32B: 35.4 (#226)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen3-4BQwQ-32B
Aider Polyglot—20.9%
BigCodeBench Instruct—44.6%
LiveBench Coding—72.2%
LMArena Coding—1333
BigCodeBench Complete—54.4%

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Qwen3-4B: 27.6 (#100), QwQ-32B: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen3-4BQwQ-32B
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard35.7%—

Reasoning QwQ-32B leads

Qwen3-4B: 19.2 (#268), QwQ-32B: 23.7 (#174)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen3-4BQwQ-32B
Chess Puzzles4%5%
LiveBench Reasoning—83.5%
LMArena Hard Prompts—1325
LiveBench Data Analysis—65%
Epoch Capabilities Index—137.6
ForecastBench—58.3
LiveBench—72%

Math QwQ-32B leads

Qwen3-4B: 29.7 (#240), QwQ-32B: 38.0 (#143)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen3-4BQwQ-32B
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202552.2%59.2%
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions38.5%—
LiveBench Math—77.8%
LMArena Math—1359

Knowledge QwQ-32B leads

Qwen3-4B: 33.0 (#208), QwQ-32B: 37.2 (#158)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen3-4BQwQ-32B
GPQA Diamond52.3%65.3%
Confabulations—15.6%
Vectara Hallucination Rate5.7%—
LMArena Expert—1324

Multilingual Not comparable

Qwen3-4B: —, QwQ-32B: 44.8 (#176)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen3-4BQwQ-32B
LMArena Non-English—1305
LMArena Chinese—1378
LMArena French—1336
LMArena German—1313
LMArena Japanese—1262
LMArena Korean—1279
LMArena Russian—1297
LMArena Spanish—1354

Instruction Following Not comparable

Qwen3-4B: —, QwQ-32B: 72.6 (#137)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen3-4BQwQ-32B
LiveBench Instruction Following—81.8%
LMArena Instruction Following—1297

Long Context Not comparable

Qwen3-4B: —, QwQ-32B: 49.0 (#11)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen3-4BQwQ-32B
Fiction.LiveBench—83.3%
LMArena Longer Query—1308

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Qwen3-4B: —, QwQ-32B: 50.6 (#180)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen3-4BQwQ-32B
LMArena Text—1329
LMArena Creative Writing—1288
Short-Story Creative Writing—80.2%
EQ-Bench Creative Writing—1257
LMArena Multi-Turn—1314
LiveBench Language—51.4%

Frequently asked questions

Is Qwen3-4B better than QwQ-32B?

QwQ-32B is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.8 to 31.9 on the Noometry Index.

How many benchmarks do Qwen3-4B and QwQ-32B share?

3 benchmarks have published results for both models. Qwen3-4B has 6 scored results on Noometry and QwQ-32B has 36.

Related comparisons

Go deeper