# Qwen1.5-32B vs Step 5 Preview

> Step 5 Preview is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.9 to 30.5 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/qwen1-5-32b-vs-step-5-preview
- Last updated: 2026-10-11
- Shared benchmarks: 13

## Summary

- They share 13 benchmarks with published results for both. Qwen1.5-32B scores higher in 0 categories and Step 5 Preview in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Step 5 Preview leads 62.8 to 34.2.
- Qwen1.5-32B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | Qwen1.5-32B | Step 5 Preview |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | StepFun |
| Noometry Index | 30.5 | 47.9 |
| Rank | 293 | 58 |
| Context | — | 1.02M |
| Input $/M | — | $1 |
| Output $/M | — | $2.70 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |

## Coding

- Qwen1.5-32B: 31.7 (#282)
- Step 5 Preview: 51.8 (#36)

| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-32B | Step 5 Preview |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1155 | 1480 |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1564 |
| SciCode | — | 58.9% |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 32.3% | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 42% | — |

## Reasoning

- Qwen1.5-32B: 21.8 (#212)
- Step 5 Preview: 40.0 (#57)

| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-32B | Step 5 Preview |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1130 | 1465 |
| CritPt | — | 20.9% |

## Math

- Qwen1.5-32B: 33.0 (#207)
- Step 5 Preview: 46.1 (#72)

| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-32B | Step 5 Preview |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1155 | 1470 |
| ProofBench | — | 42% |

## Knowledge

- Qwen1.5-32B: 13.5 (#296)
- Step 5 Preview: 41.2 (#112)

| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-32B | Step 5 Preview |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1126 | 1470 |
| GPQA Diamond | 30.7% | — |
| MMLU | 74.4% | — |

## Multimodal

- Qwen1.5-32B: —
- Step 5 Preview: 41.0 (#41)

| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-32B | Step 5 Preview |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1267 |

## Multilingual

- Qwen1.5-32B: 31.4 (#259)
- Step 5 Preview: 53.8 (#54)

| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-32B | Step 5 Preview |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1106 | 1432 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1177 | 1519 |
| LMArena Russian | 1073 | 1436 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1089 | 1439 |
| LMArena French | 1101 | — |
| LMArena German | 1058 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1027 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1008 | — |

## Instruction Following

- Qwen1.5-32B: 57.7 (#265)
- Step 5 Preview: 76.0 (#50)

| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-32B | Step 5 Preview |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1116 | 1444 |

## Long Context

- Qwen1.5-32B: 34.7 (#246)
- Step 5 Preview: 44.5 (#64)

| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-32B | Step 5 Preview |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1146 | 1455 |

## Writing & Preference

- Qwen1.5-32B: 34.2 (#271)
- Step 5 Preview: 62.8 (#71)

| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-32B | Step 5 Preview |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1137 | 1442 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1083 | 1410 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1140 | 1447 |

## FAQ

### Is Qwen1.5-32B better than Step 5 Preview?

Step 5 Preview is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.9 to 30.5 on the Noometry Index.

### Is Qwen1.5-32B or Step 5 Preview better for coding?

Step 5 Preview scores higher on coding benchmarks: 51.8 versus 31.7 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do Qwen1.5-32B and Step 5 Preview share?

13 benchmarks have published results for both models. Qwen1.5-32B has 21 scored results on Noometry and Step 5 Preview has 18.