# Gemini 3 Pro vs QwQ-32B

> Gemini 3 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 54.8 to 39.8 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/gemini-3-pro-vs-qwq-32b
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 23

## Summary

- They share 23 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 3 Pro 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 Gemini 3 Pro leads 52.5 to 23.7.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 91.4% for Gemini 3 Pro and 59.2% for QwQ-32B.
- QwQ-32B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | Gemini 3 Pro | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Google | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 54.8 | 39.8 |
| Rank | 28 | 159 |
| Context | — | — |
| Input $/M | — | — |
| Output $/M | — | — |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |

## Coding

- Gemini 3 Pro: 51.6 (#39)
- QwQ-32B: 35.4 (#226)

| Benchmark | Gemini 3 Pro | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1481 | 1333 |
| SWE-bench Verified | 72.9% | — |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 74.2% | — |
| Aider Polyglot | — | 20.9% |
| LMArena WebDev | 1440 | — |
| SWE-bench Multilingual | 68.7% | — |
| GSO | 18.6% | — |
| WeirdML | 69.9% | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 44.6% |
| LiveBench Coding | — | 72.2% |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 54.4% |
| ALE-Bench | 1,177 | — |
| AlgoTune | 1.83 | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Gemini 3 Pro: 40.6 (#23)
- QwQ-32B: —

| Benchmark | Gemini 3 Pro | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | 69.4% | — |
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 72.5% | — |
| GDPval | 40.3% | — |
| Remote Labor Index | 1.3% | — |
| τ²-bench Airline | 80.5% | — |
| τ²-bench Banking | 18% | — |
| τ²-bench Retail | 75.9% | — |
| τ²-bench Telecom | 91% | — |
| DeepResearch Bench | 46.3% | — |
| BALROG | 58.1% | — |
| LMArena Search | 1207 | — |
| METR Time Horizons | 71% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 5,478 | — |

## Reasoning

- Gemini 3 Pro: 52.5 (#31)
- QwQ-32B: 23.7 (#174)

| Benchmark | Gemini 3 Pro | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| Chess Puzzles | 31% | 5% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1480 | 1325 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 152.92 | 137.6 |
| ForecastBench | 61.2 | 58.3 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 31.1% | — |
| SimpleBench | 76.4% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 80.1% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 94.4% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 75% | — |
| CritPt | 6.9% | — |
| EnigmaEval | 18.2% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | — | 83.5% |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | — | 65% |
| LiveBench | — | 72% |

## Math

- Gemini 3 Pro: 49.9 (#59)
- QwQ-32B: 38.0 (#143)

| Benchmark | Gemini 3 Pro | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 91.4% | 59.2% |
| LMArena Math | 1476 | 1359 |
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | 67% | — |
| ProofBench | 20% | — |
| Omni-MATH | 55.5% | — |
| LiveBench Math | — | 77.8% |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 37.6% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 18.8% | — |

## Knowledge

- Gemini 3 Pro: 64.4 (#16)
- QwQ-32B: 37.2 (#158)

| Benchmark | Gemini 3 Pro | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 92.6% | 65.3% |
| LMArena Expert | 1475 | 1324 |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 37.5% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | 90.3% | — |
| Confabulations | — | 15.6% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 13.6% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 80.3% | — |

## Multimodal

- Gemini 3 Pro: 57.6 (#2)
- QwQ-32B: —

| Benchmark | Gemini 3 Pro | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1305 | — |
| GeoBench | 84% | — |
| VPCT | 91% | — |
| LMArena Document | 1434 | — |

## Multilingual

- Gemini 3 Pro: 56.9 (#16)
- QwQ-32B: 44.8 (#176)

| Benchmark | Gemini 3 Pro | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1474 | 1305 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1523 | 1378 |
| LMArena French | 1492 | 1336 |
| LMArena German | 1515 | 1313 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1510 | 1262 |
| LMArena Korean | 1448 | 1279 |
| LMArena Russian | 1493 | 1297 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1470 | 1354 |

## Instruction Following

- Gemini 3 Pro: 76.3 (#45)
- QwQ-32B: 72.6 (#137)

| Benchmark | Gemini 3 Pro | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1458 | 1297 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | — | 81.8% |
| IFEval | 87.7% | — |

## Long Context

- Gemini 3 Pro: 44.0 (#79)
- QwQ-32B: 49.0 (#11)

| Benchmark | Gemini 3 Pro | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1471 | 1308 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 83.3% |
| CL-bench | 15.8% | — |

## Writing & Preference

- Gemini 3 Pro: 66.4 (#35)
- QwQ-32B: 50.6 (#180)

| Benchmark | Gemini 3 Pro | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1479 | 1329 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1482 | 1288 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1525 | 1257 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1484 | 1314 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | — | 80.2% |
| WildBench | 85.9% | — |
| LiveBench Language | — | 51.4% |

## FAQ

### Is Gemini 3 Pro better than QwQ-32B?

Gemini 3 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 54.8 to 39.8 on the Noometry Index.

### Is Gemini 3 Pro or QwQ-32B better for coding?

Gemini 3 Pro scores higher on coding benchmarks: 51.6 versus 35.4 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do Gemini 3 Pro and QwQ-32B share?

23 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 3 Pro has 67 scored results on Noometry and QwQ-32B has 36.