# GPT-5.1-Codex vs QwQ-32B

> QwQ-32B is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.4 to 38.2 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/gpt-5-1-codex-vs-qwq-32b
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 0

## Summary

- The widest gap is in math, where QwQ-32B leads 36.2 to 29.3.
- QwQ-32B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | GPT-5.1-Codex | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenAI | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 38.2 | 39.4 |
| Rank | 178 | 153 |
| Context | 400K | — |
| Input $/M | $1.25 | — |
| Output $/M | $10 | — |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |

## Coding

- GPT-5.1-Codex: 41.7 (#107)
- QwQ-32B: 34.9 (#220)

| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 66% | — |
| Aider Polyglot | — | 20.9% |
| LMArena WebDev | 1337 | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 44.6% |
| LiveBench Coding | — | 72.2% |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1333 |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 54.4% |
| ALE-Bench | 1,245 | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- GPT-5.1-Codex: 37.8 (#32)
- QwQ-32B: —

| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | 60.4% | — |
| METR Time Horizons | 70.8% | — |

## Reasoning

- GPT-5.1-Codex: —
- QwQ-32B: 22.9 (#171)

| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| Chess Puzzles | — | 5% |
| LiveBench Reasoning | — | 83.5% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1326 |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | — | 65% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 137.6 |
| ForecastBench | — | 58.3 |
| LiveBench | — | 72% |

## Math

- GPT-5.1-Codex: 29.3 (#218)
- QwQ-32B: 36.2 (#123)

| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 59.2% |
| ProofBench | 9% | — |
| LiveBench Math | — | 77.8% |
| LMArena Math | — | 1359 |

## Knowledge

- GPT-5.1-Codex: —
- QwQ-32B: 37.2 (#150)

| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 65.3% |
| Confabulations | — | 15.6% |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1323 |

## Multilingual

- GPT-5.1-Codex: —
- QwQ-32B: 45.0 (#171)

| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1306 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1378 |
| LMArena French | — | 1337 |
| LMArena German | — | 1313 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1263 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1278 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1297 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1353 |

## Instruction Following

- GPT-5.1-Codex: —
- QwQ-32B: 72.8 (#131)

| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Instruction Following | — | 81.8% |
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1297 |

## Long Context

- GPT-5.1-Codex: —
- QwQ-32B: 49.0 (#11)

| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 83.3% |
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1308 |

## Writing & Preference

- GPT-5.1-Codex: —
- QwQ-32B: 50.9 (#175)

| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex | QwQ-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% |

## FAQ

### Is GPT-5.1-Codex better than QwQ-32B?

QwQ-32B is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.4 to 38.2 on the Noometry Index.

### Is GPT-5.1-Codex or QwQ-32B better for coding?

GPT-5.1-Codex scores higher on coding benchmarks: 41.7 versus 34.9 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do GPT-5.1-Codex and QwQ-32B share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. GPT-5.1-Codex has 6 scored results on Noometry and QwQ-32B has 36.