# Qwen1.5-7B vs QwQ-32B

> QwQ-32B is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.8 to 31.4 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/qwen1-5-7b-vs-qwq-32b
- Last updated: 2026-10-12
- Shared benchmarks: 12

## Summary

- They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. Qwen1.5-7B scores higher in 0 categories and QwQ-32B in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where QwQ-32B leads 50.6 to 29.6.

## Snapshot

| | Qwen1.5-7B | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 31.4 | 39.8 |
| Rank | 273 | 159 |
| Context | — | — |
| Input $/M | — | — |
| Output $/M | — | — |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- Qwen1.5-7B: 32.2 (#276)
- QwQ-32B: 35.4 (#226)

| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-7B | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1107 | 1333 |
| Aider Polyglot | — | 20.9% |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 44.6% |
| LiveBench Coding | — | 72.2% |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 54.4% |

## Reasoning

- Qwen1.5-7B: 20.4 (#240)
- QwQ-32B: 23.7 (#174)

| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-7B | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1065 | 1325 |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 5% |
| LiveBench Reasoning | — | 83.5% |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | — | 65% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 137.6 |
| ForecastBench | — | 58.3 |
| LiveBench | — | 72% |

## Math

- Qwen1.5-7B: 31.4 (#224)
- QwQ-32B: 38.0 (#143)

| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-7B | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1080 | 1359 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 59.2% |
| LiveBench Math | — | 77.8% |

## Knowledge

- Qwen1.5-7B: 28.7 (#243)
- QwQ-32B: 37.2 (#158)

| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-7B | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1055 | 1324 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 65.3% |
| Confabulations | — | 15.6% |
| MMLU | 62.6% | — |

## Multilingual

- Qwen1.5-7B: 28.5 (#271)
- QwQ-32B: 44.8 (#176)

| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-7B | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1058 | 1305 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1141 | 1378 |
| LMArena Russian | 1006 | 1297 |
| LMArena French | — | 1336 |
| LMArena German | — | 1313 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1262 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1279 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1354 |

## Instruction Following

- Qwen1.5-7B: 54.1 (#281)
- QwQ-32B: 72.6 (#137)

| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-7B | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1058 | 1297 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | — | 81.8% |

## Long Context

- Qwen1.5-7B: 33.1 (#266)
- QwQ-32B: 49.0 (#11)

| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-7B | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1090 | 1308 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 83.3% |

## Writing & Preference

- Qwen1.5-7B: 29.6 (#293)
- QwQ-32B: 50.6 (#180)

| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-7B | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1083 | 1329 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1035 | 1288 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1062 | 1314 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | — | 80.2% |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 1257 |
| LiveBench Language | — | 51.4% |

## FAQ

### Is Qwen1.5-7B better than QwQ-32B?

QwQ-32B is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.8 to 31.4 on the Noometry Index.

### Is Qwen1.5-7B or QwQ-32B better for coding?

QwQ-32B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 35.4 versus 32.2 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do Qwen1.5-7B and QwQ-32B share?

12 benchmarks have published results for both models. Qwen1.5-7B has 13 scored results on Noometry and QwQ-32B has 36.