# Qwen Max vs Qwen1.5-32B

> Qwen Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 34.4 to 30.0 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/qwen-max-vs-qwen1-5-32b
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 18

## Summary

- They share 18 benchmarks with published results for both. Qwen Max scores higher in 6 categories and Qwen1.5-32B in 2 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen Max leads 30.3 to 13.5.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is GPQA Diamond: 56.1% for Qwen Max and 30.7% for Qwen1.5-32B.
- Qwen1.5-32B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | Qwen Max | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 34.4 | 30.0 |
| Rank | 226 | 288 |
| Context | 33K | — |
| Input $/M | $1.60 | — |
| Output $/M | $6.40 | — |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |

## Coding

- Qwen Max: 30.3 (#288)
- Qwen1.5-32B: 31.1 (#278)

| Benchmark | Qwen Max | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1288 | 1155 |
| Aider Polyglot | 21.8% | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 32.3% |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 42% |

## Reasoning

- Qwen Max: 24.1 (#154)
- Qwen1.5-32B: 20.9 (#210)

| Benchmark | Qwen Max | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1270 | 1131 |

## Math

- Qwen Max: 21.0 (#272)
- Qwen1.5-32B: 30.5 (#207)

| Benchmark | Qwen Max | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1275 | 1155 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 16.1% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 67.2% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 1% | — |

## Knowledge

- Qwen Max: 30.3 (#222)
- Qwen1.5-32B: 13.5 (#291)

| Benchmark | Qwen Max | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 56.1% | 30.7% |
| LMArena Expert | 1248 | 1126 |
| MMLU | — | 74.4% |

## Multilingual

- Qwen Max: 42.0 (#197)
- Qwen1.5-32B: 31.6 (#254)

| Benchmark | Qwen Max | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1263 | 1106 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1254 | 1176 |
| LMArena French | 1329 | 1100 |
| LMArena German | 1254 | 1058 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1205 | 1027 |
| LMArena Korean | 1141 | 1007 |
| LMArena Russian | 1274 | 1073 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1290 | 1089 |

## Instruction Following

- Qwen Max: 66.7 (#203)
- Qwen1.5-32B: 58.0 (#260)

| Benchmark | Qwen Max | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1262 | 1116 |

## Long Context

- Qwen Max: 39.4 (#175)
- Qwen1.5-32B: 34.7 (#241)

| Benchmark | Qwen Max | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1289 | 1146 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | 66.7% | — |

## Writing & Preference

- Qwen Max: 48.0 (#200)
- Qwen1.5-32B: 34.4 (#266)

| Benchmark | Qwen Max | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1282 | 1137 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1248 | 1083 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1277 | 1140 |

## FAQ

### Is Qwen Max better than Qwen1.5-32B?

Qwen Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 34.4 to 30.0 on the Noometry Index.

### Is Qwen Max or Qwen1.5-32B better for coding?

They score almost the same on coding (30.3 vs 31.1); test both on your own repository before choosing.

### How many benchmarks do Qwen Max and Qwen1.5-32B share?

18 benchmarks have published results for both models. Qwen Max has 23 scored results on Noometry and Qwen1.5-32B has 21.