Model comparison

Qwen3 8B vs QwQ-32B

QwQ-32B is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.8 to 33.7 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 5 shared benchmarks.

Qwen3 8B Alibaba (Qwen)

33.7

Rank #238 Confirmed

QwQ-32B Alibaba (Qwen)

39.8

Rank #159 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 5 benchmarks with published results for both. Qwen3 8B scores higher in 0 categories and QwQ-32B in 5 categories; 5 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in long context, where QwQ-32B leads 49.0 to 37.9.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is Fiction.LiveBench: 62.1% for Qwen3 8B and 83.3% for QwQ-32B.

Side by side

Qwen3 8B and QwQ-32B specifications
Qwen3 8BQwQ-32B
ProviderAlibaba (Qwen)Alibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index33.739.8
Released2025-042024-11-28
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window131K—
Max output8K—
Input $ / M tokens$0.18—
Output $ / M tokens$0.70—
Results tracked1136

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

Category by category

Coding QwQ-32B leads

Qwen3 8B: 34.0 (#248), QwQ-32B: 35.4 (#226)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen3 8BQwQ-32B
Aider Polyglot—20.9%
SciCode22.6%—
BigCodeBench Instruct—44.6%
LiveBench Coding—72.2%
LMArena Coding—1333
BigCodeBench Complete—54.4%

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Qwen3 8B: 30.2 (#78), QwQ-32B: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen3 8BQwQ-32B
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard42.6%—

Reasoning QwQ-32B leads

Qwen3 8B: 16.6 (#303), QwQ-32B: 23.7 (#174)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen3 8BQwQ-32B
Chess Puzzles5%5%
Epoch Capabilities Index136.17137.6
CritPt0%—
LiveBench Reasoning—83.5%
LMArena Hard Prompts—1325
DTBench59.7%—
LiveBench Data Analysis—65%
LMCA8.8%—
ForecastBench—58.3
LiveBench—72%

Math QwQ-32B leads

Qwen3 8B: 34.9 (#191), QwQ-32B: 38.0 (#143)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen3 8BQwQ-32B
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202556.1%59.2%
LiveBench Math—77.8%
LMArena Math—1359

Knowledge QwQ-32B leads

Qwen3 8B: 36.1 (#173), QwQ-32B: 37.2 (#158)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen3 8BQwQ-32B
GPQA Diamond56.8%65.3%
Confabulations—15.6%
Vectara Hallucination Rate4.8%—
LMArena Expert—1324

Multilingual Not comparable

Qwen3 8B: —, QwQ-32B: 44.8 (#176)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen3 8BQwQ-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 8B: —, QwQ-32B: 72.6 (#137)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen3 8BQwQ-32B
LiveBench Instruction Following—81.8%
LMArena Instruction Following—1297

Long Context QwQ-32B leads

Qwen3 8B: 37.9 (#210), QwQ-32B: 49.0 (#11)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen3 8BQwQ-32B
Fiction.LiveBench62.1%83.3%
LMArena Longer Query—1308

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Qwen3 8B: —, QwQ-32B: 50.6 (#180)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen3 8BQwQ-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 8B better than QwQ-32B?

QwQ-32B is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.8 to 33.7 on the Noometry Index.

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

QwQ-32B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 35.4 versus 34.0 in the Noometry coding category.

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

5 benchmarks have published results for both models. Qwen3 8B has 11 scored results on Noometry and QwQ-32B has 36.

Related comparisons

Go deeper