# GPT-4o mini vs QwQ-32B

> QwQ-32B is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.4 to 25.4 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/gpt-4o-mini-vs-qwq-32b
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 34

## Summary

- They share 34 benchmarks with published results for both. GPT-4o mini scores higher in 0 categories and QwQ-32B in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where QwQ-32B leads 36.2 to 9.9.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 6.9% for GPT-4o mini and 59.2% for QwQ-32B.
- QwQ-32B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | GPT-4o mini | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenAI | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 25.4 | 39.4 |
| Rank | 337 | 153 |
| Context | 128K | — |
| Input $/M | $0.15 | — |
| Output $/M | $0.60 | — |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |

## Coding

- GPT-4o mini: 21.6 (#330)
- QwQ-32B: 34.9 (#220)

| Benchmark | GPT-4o mini | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| Aider Polyglot | 3.6% | 20.9% |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 46.1% | 44.6% |
| LiveBench Coding | 43.1% | 72.2% |
| LMArena Coding | 1290 | 1333 |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 57.4% | 54.4% |
| WeirdML | 11.8% | — |
| HumanEval+ | 83.5% | — |
| MBPP+ | 72.2% | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- GPT-4o mini: 27.2 (#95)
- QwQ-32B: —

| Benchmark | GPT-4o mini | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| BALROG | 17.4% | — |

## Reasoning

- GPT-4o mini: 8.7 (#343)
- QwQ-32B: 22.9 (#171)

| Benchmark | GPT-4o mini | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| Chess Puzzles | 0% | 5% |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 32.8% | 83.5% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1267 | 1326 |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 50% | 65% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 126.56 | 137.6 |
| LiveBench | 41.3% | 72% |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 0% | — |
| SimpleBench | 10.7% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 28.8% | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 12% | — |
| DTBench | 54.4% | — |
| LMCA | 10.4% | — |
| ForecastBench | — | 58.3 |
| PIQA | 88.7% | — |

## Math

- GPT-4o mini: 9.9 (#307)
- QwQ-32B: 36.2 (#123)

| Benchmark | GPT-4o mini | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 6.9% | 59.2% |
| LiveBench Math | 36.3% | 77.8% |
| LMArena Math | 1267 | 1359 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 0.7% | — |
| Omni-MATH | 28% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 52.6% | — |
| GSM8K | 91.3% | — |

## Knowledge

- GPT-4o mini: 17.7 (#279)
- QwQ-32B: 37.2 (#150)

| Benchmark | GPT-4o mini | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 37.7% | 65.3% |
| Confabulations | 37.2% | 15.6% |
| LMArena Expert | 1235 | 1323 |
| SimpleQA Verified | 8.3% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | 60.3% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 36.8% | — |
| BoolQ | 88.7% | — |
| MMLU | 81.8% | — |

## Multimodal

- GPT-4o mini: 25.3 (#117)
- QwQ-32B: —

| Benchmark | GPT-4o mini | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1066 | — |
| Video-MME | 64.8% | — |
| GeoBench | 64% | — |
| VPCT | 34% | — |

## Multilingual

- GPT-4o mini: 42.2 (#194)
- QwQ-32B: 45.0 (#171)

| Benchmark | GPT-4o mini | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1266 | 1306 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1264 | 1378 |
| LMArena French | 1296 | 1337 |
| LMArena German | 1272 | 1313 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1216 | 1263 |
| LMArena Korean | 1195 | 1278 |
| LMArena Russian | 1275 | 1297 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1276 | 1353 |

## Instruction Following

- GPT-4o mini: 62.1 (#234)
- QwQ-32B: 72.8 (#131)

| Benchmark | GPT-4o mini | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 56.8% | 81.8% |
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1259 | 1297 |
| IFEval | 78.2% | — |

## Long Context

- GPT-4o mini: 39.1 (#181)
- QwQ-32B: 49.0 (#11)

| Benchmark | GPT-4o mini | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1289 | 1308 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 83.3% |

## Writing & Preference

- GPT-4o mini: 39.7 (#243)
- QwQ-32B: 50.9 (#175)

| Benchmark | GPT-4o mini | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1286 | 1329 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1268 | 1288 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 67.2% | 80.2% |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 873 | 1257 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1285 | 1314 |
| LiveBench Language | 28.6% | 51.4% |
| WildBench | 79.1% | — |

## FAQ

### Is GPT-4o mini better than QwQ-32B?

QwQ-32B is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.4 to 25.4 on the Noometry Index.

### Is GPT-4o mini or QwQ-32B better for coding?

QwQ-32B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 34.9 versus 21.6 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do GPT-4o mini and QwQ-32B share?

34 benchmarks have published results for both models. GPT-4o mini has 60 scored results on Noometry and QwQ-32B has 36.