# Claude Opus 4.1 vs QwQ-32B

> Claude Opus 4.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.0 to 39.8 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/claude-opus-4-1-vs-qwq-32b
- Last updated: 2026-10-12
- Shared benchmarks: 24

## Summary

- They share 24 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 4.1 scores higher in 6 categories and QwQ-32B in 2 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where QwQ-32B leads 38.0 to 22.3.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is GPQA Diamond: 77.3% for Claude Opus 4.1 and 65.3% for QwQ-32B.
- QwQ-32B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | Claude Opus 4.1 | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 41.0 | 39.8 |
| Rank | 142 | 159 |
| Context | 200K | — |
| Input $/M | $15 | — |
| Output $/M | $75 | — |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |

## Coding

- Claude Opus 4.1: 44.4 (#73)
- QwQ-32B: 35.4 (#226)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1479 | 1333 |
| SWE-bench Verified | 73.3% | — |
| Aider Polyglot | — | 20.9% |
| LMArena WebDev | 1390 | — |
| WeirdML | 45.9% | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 44.6% |
| LiveBench Coding | — | 72.2% |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 54.4% |
| ALE-Bench | 674.77 | — |
| AlgoTune | 1.34 | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Claude Opus 4.1: 35.0 (#41)
- QwQ-32B: —

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | 38% | — |
| GDPval | 43.6% | — |
| Cybench | 42% | — |
| DeepResearch Bench | 48.3% | — |
| LMArena Search | 1148 | — |
| METR Time Horizons | 66.8% | — |

## Reasoning

- Claude Opus 4.1: 32.2 (#76)
- QwQ-32B: 23.7 (#174)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| Chess Puzzles | 7% | 5% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1443 | 1325 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 144.12 | 137.6 |
| ForecastBench | 62 | 58.3 |
| SimpleBench | 60% | — |
| EnigmaEval | 7.2% | — |
| EBR-Bench | 7.9% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | — | 83.5% |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 21% | — |
| DTBench | 80% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | — | 65% |
| LMCA | 37.1% | — |
| LiveBench | — | 72% |

## Math

- Claude Opus 4.1: 22.3 (#277)
- QwQ-32B: 38.0 (#143)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 68.9% | 59.2% |
| LMArena Math | 1431 | 1359 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 12.6% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 2.4% | — |
| LiveBench Math | — | 77.8% |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 7.2% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 4.2% | — |

## Knowledge

- Claude Opus 4.1: 42.0 (#101)
- QwQ-32B: 37.2 (#158)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 77.3% | 65.3% |
| Confabulations | 17.1% | 15.6% |
| LMArena Expert | 1439 | 1324 |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 11.5% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 11.8% | — |

## Multimodal

- Claude Opus 4.1: 26.8 (#119)
- QwQ-32B: —

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| VPCT | 35% | — |

## Multilingual

- Claude Opus 4.1: 52.0 (#95)
- QwQ-32B: 44.8 (#176)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1405 | 1305 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1427 | 1378 |
| LMArena French | 1431 | 1336 |
| LMArena German | 1413 | 1313 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1378 | 1262 |
| LMArena Korean | 1380 | 1279 |
| LMArena Russian | 1422 | 1297 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1448 | 1354 |

## Instruction Following

- Claude Opus 4.1: 75.6 (#58)
- QwQ-32B: 72.6 (#137)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1435 | 1297 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | — | 81.8% |

## Long Context

- Claude Opus 4.1: 44.5 (#63)
- QwQ-32B: 49.0 (#11)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1455 | 1308 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 83.3% |

## Writing & Preference

- Claude Opus 4.1: 62.4 (#74)
- QwQ-32B: 50.6 (#180)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1419 | 1329 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1412 | 1288 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 84.7% | 80.2% |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1444 | 1314 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 1257 |
| LiveBench Language | — | 51.4% |

## FAQ

### Is Claude Opus 4.1 better than QwQ-32B?

Claude Opus 4.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.0 to 39.8 on the Noometry Index.

### Is Claude Opus 4.1 or QwQ-32B better for coding?

Claude Opus 4.1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 44.4 versus 35.4 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 4.1 and QwQ-32B share?

24 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 4.1 has 48 scored results on Noometry and QwQ-32B has 36.