Model comparison
Qwen3.5-9B vs QwQ-32B
QwQ-32B is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.8 to 33.8 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 4 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 4 benchmarks with published results for both. Qwen3.5-9B scores higher in 2 categories and QwQ-32B in 2 categories; 2 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen3.5-9B leads 46.0 to 37.2.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is GPQA Diamond: 79% for Qwen3.5-9B and 65.3% for QwQ-32B.
Side by side
| Qwen3.5-9B | QwQ-32B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 33.8 | 39.8 |
| Released | 2026-02-23 | 2024-11-28 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 262K | — |
| Max output | 66K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.10 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.15 | — |
| Results tracked | 10 | 36 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Too close to call
Qwen3.5-9B: 35.9 (#217), QwQ-32B: 35.4 (#226)
| Benchmark | Qwen3.5-9B | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| Aider Polyglot | — | 20.9% |
| SciCode | 27.5% | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 44.6% |
| LiveBench Coding | — | 72.2% |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1333 |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 54.4% |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Qwen3.5-9B: 14.5 (#151), QwQ-32B: —
| Benchmark | Qwen3.5-9B | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | 9.2% | — |
Reasoning Too close to call
Qwen3.5-9B: 23.1 (#182), QwQ-32B: 23.7 (#174)
| Benchmark | Qwen3.5-9B | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| Chess Puzzles | 12% | 5% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 139.46 | 137.6 |
| CritPt | 0.3% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | — | 83.5% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1325 |
| DTBench | 71.2% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | — | 65% |
| LMCA | 24.5% | — |
| ForecastBench | — | 58.3 |
| LiveBench | — | 72% |
Math QwQ-32B leads
Qwen3.5-9B: 34.8 (#192), QwQ-32B: 38.0 (#143)
| Benchmark | Qwen3.5-9B | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 61.7% | 59.2% |
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | 48.5% | — |
| LiveBench Math | — | 77.8% |
| LMArena Math | — | 1359 |
Knowledge Qwen3.5-9B leads
Qwen3.5-9B: 46.0 (#84), QwQ-32B: 37.2 (#158)
| Benchmark | Qwen3.5-9B | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 79% | 65.3% |
| Confabulations | — | 15.6% |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1324 |
Multilingual Not comparable
Qwen3.5-9B: —, QwQ-32B: 44.8 (#176)
| Benchmark | Qwen3.5-9B | QwQ-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
Qwen3.5-9B: —, QwQ-32B: 72.6 (#137)
| Benchmark | Qwen3.5-9B | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Instruction Following | — | 81.8% |
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1297 |
Long Context Not comparable
Qwen3.5-9B: —, QwQ-32B: 49.0 (#11)
| Benchmark | Qwen3.5-9B | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 83.3% |
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1308 |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Qwen3.5-9B: —, QwQ-32B: 50.6 (#180)
| Benchmark | Qwen3.5-9B | QwQ-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 Qwen3.5-9B better than QwQ-32B?
QwQ-32B is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.8 to 33.8 on the Noometry Index.
Is Qwen3.5-9B or QwQ-32B better for coding?
They score almost the same on coding (35.9 vs 35.4); test both on your own repository before choosing.
How many benchmarks do Qwen3.5-9B and QwQ-32B share?
4 benchmarks have published results for both models. Qwen3.5-9B has 10 scored results on Noometry and QwQ-32B has 36.