# Claude Fable 5.1 vs QwQ-32B

> Claude Fable 5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 69.0 to 39.8 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/claude-fable-5-1-vs-qwq-32b
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 21

## Summary

- They share 21 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Fable 5.1 scores higher in 7 categories and QwQ-32B in 1 category; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Claude Fable 5.1 leads 76.7 to 23.7.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is Chess Puzzles: 47% for Claude Fable 5.1 and 5% for QwQ-32B.
- QwQ-32B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | Claude Fable 5.1 | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 69.0 | 39.8 |
| Rank | 2 | 159 |
| Context | 1M | — |
| Input $/M | $10 | — |
| Output $/M | $50 | — |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |

## Coding

- Claude Fable 5.1: 74.7 (#1)
- QwQ-32B: 35.4 (#226)

| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1528 | 1333 |
| FrontierCode | 50.9% | — |
| Aider Polyglot | — | 20.9% |
| CursorBench | 51.8% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1744 | — |
| FrontierSWE | 56.3% | — |
| SciCode | 63.1% | — |
| GSO | 88.2% | — |
| WeirdML | 92.9% | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 44.6% |
| LiveBench Coding | — | 72.2% |
| MirrorCode | 73.3% | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 54.4% |
| ALE-Bench | 2,143 | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Claude Fable 5.1: 50.7 (#5)
- QwQ-32B: —

| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | 68.6% | — |
| Remote Labor Index | 17.9% | — |
| GDP.pdf | 29.6% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 5,422 | — |

## Reasoning

- Claude Fable 5.1: 76.7 (#7)
- QwQ-32B: 23.7 (#174)

| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| Chess Puzzles | 47% | 5% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1526 | 1325 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 164.7 | 137.6 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 90% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 90% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 97.5% | — |
| CritPt | 31.1% | — |
| EBR-Bench | 57.1% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | — | 83.5% |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 58% | — |
| DTBench | 97.6% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | — | 65% |
| LMCA | 65.5% | — |
| ForecastBench | — | 58.3 |
| LiveBench | — | 72% |

## Math

- Claude Fable 5.1: 89.6 (#4)
- QwQ-32B: 38.0 (#143)

| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 100% | 59.2% |
| LMArena Math | 1525 | 1359 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 90.2% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 87.8% | — |
| ProofBench | 100% | — |
| LiveBench Math | — | 77.8% |
| FrontierMath Erdős | 0% | — |

## Knowledge

- Claude Fable 5.1: 69.6 (#6)
- QwQ-32B: 37.2 (#158)

| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1535 | 1324 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 65.3% |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 46.5% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | 70.8% | — |
| Confabulations | — | 15.6% |

## Multimodal

- Claude Fable 5.1: 53.9 (#4)
- QwQ-32B: —

| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1318 | — |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | 41.9% | — |
| Furniture Assembly | 70% | — |
| LMArena Document | 1513 | — |

## Multilingual

- Claude Fable 5.1: 59.1 (#3)
- QwQ-32B: 44.8 (#176)

| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1507 | 1305 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1586 | 1378 |
| LMArena French | 1525 | 1336 |
| LMArena German | 1500 | 1313 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1543 | 1262 |
| LMArena Korean | 1534 | 1279 |
| LMArena Russian | 1521 | 1297 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1516 | 1354 |

## Instruction Following

- Claude Fable 5.1: 79.2 (#6)
- QwQ-32B: 72.6 (#137)

| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1517 | 1297 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | — | 81.8% |

## Long Context

- Claude Fable 5.1: 46.7 (#20)
- QwQ-32B: 49.0 (#11)

| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1522 | 1308 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 83.3% |

## Writing & Preference

- Claude Fable 5.1: 79.2 (#2)
- QwQ-32B: 50.6 (#180)

| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1510 | 1329 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1507 | 1288 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 2162 | 1257 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1492 | 1314 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | — | 80.2% |
| LiveBench Language | — | 51.4% |

## FAQ

### Is Claude Fable 5.1 better than QwQ-32B?

Claude Fable 5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 69.0 to 39.8 on the Noometry Index.

### Is Claude Fable 5.1 or QwQ-32B better for coding?

Claude Fable 5.1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 74.7 versus 35.4 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do Claude Fable 5.1 and QwQ-32B share?

21 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Fable 5.1 has 52 scored results on Noometry and QwQ-32B has 36.