Noometry

Model comparison

Qwen3.8 Max vs QwQ-32B

Qwen3.8 Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 56.8 to 39.8 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 21 shared benchmarks.

Qwen3.8 Max Alibaba (Qwen)

56.8

Rank #22 Confirmed

QwQ-32B Alibaba (Qwen)

39.8

Rank #159 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 21 benchmarks with published results for both. Qwen3.8 Max scores higher in 7 categories and QwQ-32B in 1 category; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where Qwen3.8 Max leads 73.2 to 38.0.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 100% for Qwen3.8 Max and 59.2% for QwQ-32B.
  • QwQ-32B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Qwen3.8 MaxQwQ-32B
ProviderAlibaba (Qwen)Alibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index56.839.8
Released2026-08-022024-11-28
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1M—
Max output131K—
Input $ / M tokens$2—
Output $ / M tokens$6—
Results tracked3936

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

Category by category

Coding Qwen3.8 Max leads

Qwen3.8 Max: 53.5 (#29), QwQ-32B: 35.4 (#226)

BenchmarkQwen3.8 MaxQwQ-32B
LMArena Coding15021333
DeepSWE57.5%—
Aider Polyglot—20.9%
LMArena WebDev1674—
FrontierSWE17.8%—
SciCode53.2%—
BigCodeBench Instruct—44.6%
LiveBench Coding—72.2%
BigCodeBench Complete—54.4%

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Qwen3.8 Max: 45.4 (#14), QwQ-32B: —

BenchmarkQwen3.8 MaxQwQ-32B
APEX-Agents63.3%—
τ²-bench Banking55.1%—
GDP.pdf23.2%—

Reasoning Qwen3.8 Max leads

Qwen3.8 Max: 54.4 (#26), QwQ-32B: 23.7 (#174)

BenchmarkQwen3.8 MaxQwQ-32B
Chess Puzzles40%5%
LMArena Hard Prompts14961325
Epoch Capabilities Index156.41137.6
NYT Connections (extended)88.3%—
CritPt20%—
LiveBench Reasoning—83.5%
Mystery Game Puzzles38%—
DTBench92%—
LiveBench Data Analysis—65%
LMCA46.2%—
ForecastBench—58.3
LiveBench—72%

Math Qwen3.8 Max leads

Qwen3.8 Max: 73.2 (#20), QwQ-32B: 38.0 (#143)

BenchmarkQwen3.8 MaxQwQ-32B
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025100%59.2%
LMArena Math14991359
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)74.7%—
FrontierMath Tier 446.3%—
ProofBench58%—
LiveBench Math—77.8%

Knowledge Qwen3.8 Max leads

Qwen3.8 Max: 61.7 (#27), QwQ-32B: 37.2 (#158)

BenchmarkQwen3.8 MaxQwQ-32B
GPQA Diamond92.7%65.3%
LMArena Expert15071324
SimpleQA Verified47.3%—
Confabulations—15.6%

Multimodal Not comparable

Qwen3.8 Max: 37.2 (#75), QwQ-32B: —

BenchmarkQwen3.8 MaxQwQ-32B
LMArena Vision1314—
Furniture Assembly20%—

Multilingual Qwen3.8 Max leads

Qwen3.8 Max: 56.7 (#18), QwQ-32B: 44.8 (#176)

BenchmarkQwen3.8 MaxQwQ-32B
LMArena Non-English14721305
LMArena Chinese15381378
LMArena French15031336
LMArena German14831313
LMArena Japanese14671262
LMArena Korean14611279
LMArena Russian14811297
LMArena Spanish14921354

Instruction Following Qwen3.8 Max leads

Qwen3.8 Max: 77.6 (#17), QwQ-32B: 72.6 (#137)

BenchmarkQwen3.8 MaxQwQ-32B
LMArena Instruction Following14791297
LiveBench Instruction Following—81.8%

Long Context QwQ-32B leads

Qwen3.8 Max: 45.6 (#31), QwQ-32B: 49.0 (#11)

BenchmarkQwen3.8 MaxQwQ-32B
LMArena Longer Query14891308
Fiction.LiveBench—83.3%

Writing & Preference Qwen3.8 Max leads

Qwen3.8 Max: 67.1 (#30), QwQ-32B: 50.6 (#180)

BenchmarkQwen3.8 MaxQwQ-32B
LMArena Text14831329
LMArena Creative Writing14791288
LMArena Multi-Turn14891314
Short-Story Creative Writing—80.2%
EQ-Bench Creative Writing—1257
LiveBench Language—51.4%

Frequently asked questions

Is Qwen3.8 Max better than QwQ-32B?

Qwen3.8 Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 56.8 to 39.8 on the Noometry Index.

Is Qwen3.8 Max or QwQ-32B better for coding?

Qwen3.8 Max scores higher on coding benchmarks: 53.5 versus 35.4 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Qwen3.8 Max and QwQ-32B share?

21 benchmarks have published results for both models. Qwen3.8 Max has 39 scored results on Noometry and QwQ-32B has 36.

Related comparisons

Go deeper