Qwen3.5vsQwQ-32B-Preview
Qwen3.5 | QwQ-32B-Preview | |
|---|---|---|
| Specifications | ||
ParametersA rough measure of how big the model is. More parameters usually means more capable and more expensive to run, though it is a poor guide on its own — a smaller, newer model often beats a larger, older one. | 397B | 32B |
Context windowHow much text the model can hold in mind at once — your question, any documents you attach, the conversation so far, and its own reply. Go past it and the earliest part falls out of view. | 1M | 32k |
| API pricingUSD per 1M tokens · lower wins | ||
Input priceWhat you pay for everything you send the model — your question, plus any documents or earlier conversation you include with it. | $0.60 | — |
Output priceWhat you pay for the text the model writes back. It is normally the dearer half: producing an answer costs more than reading one. | $3.60 | — |
Cheapest inputLowest input rate across third-party providers, excluding the lab itself. The cheapest endpoint may run a quantised build or a shorter context — see "Available from" on the model page. | $0.05Darkbloom | — |
Cheapest outputLowest output rate across third-party providers, excluding the lab itself. May come from a different provider than the cheapest input. | $0.10Darkbloom | — |
| BenchmarksPublished by one model only | ||
SWE-Bench VerifiedCoding — Real coding tasks pulled from open-source projects — the AI has to find and fix actual bugs. A human-checked version of the original SWE-Bench. Higher is better. | 76.4% | — |
SWE-Bench MultilingualMultilingual coding — Like SWE-Bench, but the coding problems span many programming languages, not just one. Tests how broadly the AI can code. Higher is better. | 69.3% | — |
Terminal-Bench 2.0Agentic terminal coding — Can the AI work in a command-line terminal — running commands and finishing technical setup tasks the way a developer would? (Version 2.0 of the test.) Higher is better. | 52.5% | — |
BrowseCompWeb browsing — Can the AI browse the web and track down hard-to-find answers? Higher is better. | 69% | — |
Humanity's Last Exam · no toolsMultidisciplinary reasoning — Humanity's Last Exam — extremely hard expert questions across many subjects, written so you can't just look up the answer. “No tools” means the AI answers on its own. Higher is better. | 28.7% | — |
GPQA DiamondScience — Graduate-level science questions in biology, physics, and chemistry — hard enough that subject-matter PhDs score around 65%. Higher is better. | 88.4% | — |
OSWorld-VerifiedAgentic computer use — Can the AI actually operate a computer — clicking, typing, and using real apps — to finish tasks on its own? Higher is better. | 62.2% | — |
CharXiv ReasoningChart reasoning — Can the AI read and reason about complex charts and figures, not just text? Higher is better. | 80.8% | — |
MMMU-ProMultimodal reasoning — A tougher version of MMMU — college-level questions that mix images, diagrams, and text together. Higher is better. | 79% | — |
MMMUMultimodal — Tests the AI on understanding images and text together across many college subjects. Higher is better. | 85% | — |
| Overview | ||
| Company | Qwen | Qwen |
| Release date | Feb 16 2026 | Nov 28 2024 |
| Access | Open Weight | Open Weight |
Other comparisons
Qwen3.5vsClaude Fable 5.1QwQ-32B-PreviewvsClaude Fable 5.1Qwen3.5vsGPT-6 AstraQwQ-32B-PreviewvsGPT-6 AstraQwen3.5vsGemini 3.8 FlashQwQ-32B-PreviewvsGemini 3.8 FlashQwen3.5vsMuse Spark 1.3QwQ-32B-PreviewvsMuse Spark 1.3Qwen3.5vsGrok 4.6QwQ-32B-PreviewvsGrok 4.6Qwen3.5vsDeepSeek-V4.1-FlashQwQ-32B-PreviewvsDeepSeek-V4.1-Flash
Frequently asked questions
Qwen3.5 and QwQ-32B-Preview don't publish scores on any of the same benchmarks, so there's no direct head-to-head comparison. Only Qwen3.5 has a verified first-party API price: $0.60 per million input tokens and $3.60 per million output tokens. No pay-as-you-go API rate is tracked for QwQ-32B-Preview. QwQ-32B-Preview shipped 445 days before Qwen3.5, so benchmark comparisons should account for the intervening progress.
Qwen3.5 has 397B parameters, while QwQ-32B-Preview has 32B. Context windows are 1M (Qwen3.5) vs 32k (QwQ-32B-Preview).
Direct benchmark comparisons are unavailable — Qwen3.5 and QwQ-32B-Preview don't publish scores on any of the same benchmarks.