QwQ-32B-PreviewvsGrok 4.5
QwQ-32B-Preview | Grok 4.5 | |
|---|---|---|
| Specifications | ||
Parameters | 32B | — |
Context window | 32k | — |
| Benchmarks | ||
Nonsense detection BullshitBench v2Given a confidently-worded but nonsensical prompt, does the AI spot that it makes no sense and push back — instead of playing along and inventing an answer? The score is how often it clearly called out the nonsense. Higher is better. | — | 54% |
Prompt injection robustness Gray Swan IPI · k = 1Attackers hide malicious instructions inside content the AI reads — a web page, an email, a document — and try to hijack what it does. Gray Swan's indirect prompt injection benchmark measures how often such an attack succeeds when the attacker gets a single try. Lower is better. | — | 13.4% |
Prompt injection robustness Gray Swan IPI · k = 10Attackers hide malicious instructions inside content the AI reads — a web page, an email, a document — and try to hijack what it does. This variant gives the attacker 10 tries and counts an attack as successful if any of them works. Lower is better. | — | 54.2% |
Prompt injection robustness Gray Swan IPI · k = 15Attackers hide malicious instructions inside content the AI reads — a web page, an email, a document — and try to hijack what it does. This variant gives the attacker 15 tries and counts an attack as successful if any of them works. Lower is better. | — | 60.8% |
Agentic coding SWE-Bench ProCan the AI fix real bugs in real software? It's handed actual problems from open-source projects and has to write code that genuinely solves them. Higher is better. | — | 64.7% |
Multilingual coding SWE-Bench MultilingualLike SWE-Bench, but the coding problems span many programming languages, not just one. Tests how broadly the AI can code. Higher is better. | — | 78% |
Agentic coding CursorBench v3.2Cursor's own test of harder, real-world coding tasks inside a code editor, on the refreshed v3.2 task set. Scores aren't comparable with v3.1. Higher is better. | — | 66.7% |
Agentic coding DeepSWE 1.1Artificial Analysis' independent test of deep, agentic software-engineering work — the AI has to plan and carry out substantial coding tasks end to end. (Version 1.1 of the test.) Higher is better. | — | 54% |
Agentic coding DeepSWE 1.0Artificial Analysis' independent test of deep, agentic software-engineering work — the AI has to plan and carry out substantial coding tasks end to end. Higher is better. | — | 62% |
Next.js coding Next.js EvalsVercel's open eval of how well AI coding agents build and migrate real Next.js apps — measured as the share of tasks the agent completes successfully. Higher is better. | — | 83% |
Agentic computer work Frontier-Bench v0.1A hard, ever-evolving set of real computer tasks — coding, system administration, data work, and more — that an AI agent has to complete on its own. Run by the Harbor / Laude Institute team as the successor to Terminal-Bench (v0.1 is the first release of the task set). The score is the share of tasks solved. Higher is better. | — | 17.8% |
Agentic terminal coding Terminal-Bench 2.1Can the AI work in a command-line terminal — running commands and finishing technical setup tasks the way a developer would? Higher is better. | — | 83.3% |
Agentic legal work Harvey's Legal Agent BenchmarkHarvey's test of whether an AI agent can complete real legal work — drafting and reviewing documents, working with spreadsheets and presentations, and navigating files the way a lawyer's assistant would. Higher is better. | — | 12.92% |
Medical admin work MedScribeCan the AI support doctors with their administrative work, like notes and paperwork? Created by Vals AI. Higher is better. | — | 86.88% |
Community preference (code) Arena Elo (Code)Like the text arena, but people vote on which AI writes better code. The votes become a chess-style Elo rating on arena.ai. Higher is better. | — | 1549 |
| Overview | ||
| Company | Qwen | SpaceXAI |
| Release date | Nov 28 2024 | Jul 8 2026 |
| Access | Open Weight | Proprietary |
Which is better: QwQ-32B-Preview or Grok 4.5?
QwQ-32B-Preview and Grok 4.5 don't publish scores on any of the same benchmarks, so there's no direct head-to-head comparison. QwQ-32B-Preview shipped 587 days before Grok 4.5, so benchmark comparisons should account for the intervening progress.
QwQ-32B-Preview is open weight, while Grok 4.5 is proprietary.
Direct benchmark comparisons are unavailable — QwQ-32B-Preview and Grok 4.5 don't publish scores on any of the same benchmarks.
Frequently asked questions
QwQ-32B-Preview was released by Qwen on Nov 28 2024.
Grok 4.5 was released by SpaceXAI on Jul 8 2026.
QwQ-32B-Preview is an open weight model released by Qwen. Grok 4.5 is a proprietary model released by SpaceXAI.
Other comparisons
QwQ-32B-PreviewvsClaude Opus 5Grok 4.5vsClaude Opus 5QwQ-32B-PreviewvsGPT-5.6 SolGrok 4.5vsGPT-5.6 SolQwQ-32B-PreviewvsGemini 3.6 FlashGrok 4.5vsGemini 3.6 FlashQwQ-32B-PreviewvsMuse Spark 1.1Grok 4.5vsMuse Spark 1.1QwQ-32B-PreviewvsDeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731Grok 4.5vsDeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731QwQ-32B-PreviewvsMistral Medium 3.5Grok 4.5vsMistral Medium 3.5