Nova Pro 1.0 vs Qwen3 32B
Qwen3 32B leads Nova Pro 1.0 on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 7.3 to 7.0, and Qwen3 32B costs 8.0x less per output token ($0.40 vs $3.20 per million). Updated October 21, 2026; 34 benchmarks have a result for both.
Nova Pro 1.0 or Qwen3 32B: which to pick
Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.
Pick Nova Pro 1.0 for a larger context window (300K against 131K tokens) and work measured by LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run) or LMArena Text: coding, where it leads.
- Shared results
- 34
- Nova Pro 1.0 only
- 8
- Qwen3 32B only
- 8
- Like-for-like categories
- 7 of 9
Only benchmarks that tested both models count toward a pick; a result only one model has is shown but not compared.
Which one for your work
Each card is decided by one number both models carry. Where only one has it, the card says so and makes no call.
Coding
Vibe Coding Index, six public coding benchmarks
No call
Neither has a coding score yet.
One side not measured
Intelligence
AA Intelligence Index
Qwen3 32B
Qwen3 32B leads, 7.3 against 7.0.
Same board, both measured
Web design
Design Arena: websites
No call
Only Nova Pro 1.0 has a Design Arena: websites result, 796.
Directional only
Long documents
Listed context window
Nova Pro 1.0
Nova Pro 1.0 takes 300K tokens against 131K.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Qwen3 32B
Nova Pro 1.0 $0.0024, Qwen3 32B $0.0003 per turn.
List prices
At a glance
- Coding index
- Nova Pro 1.0 not benchmarked, Qwen3 32B not benchmarked.
- Widest category
- Math, 45.7 points apart on average over 4 shared benchmarks.
- Widest single gap
- AA Math Index: Nova Pro 1.0 7.0 against Qwen3 32B 73.0, 66.0 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
- Output price
- Nova Pro 1.0 $3.20 against Qwen3 32B $0.40 per million output tokens, 8.0x apart.
- Context window
- Nova Pro 1.0 takes 300K tokens, Qwen3 32B 131K.
Benchmark by benchmark
First the score: boards each model leads, per category, where both have a result. Then every board, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale, so compare the two in a row, not one row with another.
| Category | Nova Pro 1.0 | Bars | Qwen3 32B | Ties |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | 1 | 3 | ||
| Intelligence | 0 | 1 | ||
| Agentic work | 0 | 1 | ||
| Reasoning | 0 | 5 | ||
| Math | 0 | 4 | ||
| Knowledge | 0 | 5 | ||
| General | 2 | 12 | ||
| All shared boards | 3 | 31 |
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index13
| Benchmark | Nova Pro 1.0 | Qwen3 32B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aider polyglot | Not measured | 40.0% | Only Qwen3 32B measured |
| LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run) | 23.3% | 54.6% | Qwen3 32B |
| SciCode | Not measured | 36.0% | Only Qwen3 32B measured |
| Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) | 6.1% | 3.0% | Nova Pro 1.0 |
| LMArena Text: coding | 1270 | 1357 | Qwen3 32B |
| LMArena Text: software and IT | 1271 | 1366 | Qwen3 32B |
| Neither model has a result on the other 32 boards here | |||
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
| Benchmark | Nova Pro 1.0 | Qwen3 32B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | 7.0 | 7.3 | Qwen3 32B |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | Not measured | 138.4 | Only Qwen3 32B measured |
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
| Benchmark | Nova Pro 1.0 | Qwen3 32B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| τ²-Bench Telecom | 14.0% | 29.8% | Qwen3 32B |
| Neither model has a result on the other 38 boards here | |||
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index05
| Benchmark | Nova Pro 1.0 | Qwen3 32B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) | 49.9% | 66.8% | Qwen3 32B |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run) | 3.2% | 7.4% | Qwen3 32B |
| GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run) | Not measured | 65.7% | Only Qwen3 32B measured |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts | 1246 | 1334 | Qwen3 32B |
| LMArena Text: expert | 1211 | 1362 | Qwen3 32B |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts in English | 1259 | 1350 | Qwen3 32B |
| Neither model has a result on the other 15 boards here | |||
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index04
| Benchmark | Nova Pro 1.0 | Qwen3 32B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Math Index | 7.0 | 73.0 | Qwen3 32B |
| AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run) | 7.0% | 73.0% | Qwen3 32B |
| OTIS Mock AIME | Not measured | 66.9% | Only Qwen3 32B measured |
| LMArena Text: math | 1252 | 1399 | Qwen3 32B |
| LMArena Text: mathematical work | 1261 | 1420 | Qwen3 32B |
| Neither model has a result on the other 8 boards here | |||
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index05
| Benchmark | Nova Pro 1.0 | Qwen3 32B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run) | 69.1% | 79.8% | Qwen3 32B |
| MMLU | 82.0% | Not measured | Only Nova Pro 1.0 measured |
| LMArena Text: science | 1255 | 1372 | Qwen3 32B |
| LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare | 1260 | 1368 | Qwen3 32B |
| LMArena Text: legal and government | 1281 | 1324 | Qwen3 32B |
| LMArena Text: business and finance | 1229 | 1318 | Qwen3 32B |
| Neither model has a result on the other 11 boards here | |||
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board, none shared
| Benchmark | Nova Pro 1.0 | Qwen3 32B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena: websites | 796 | Not measured | Only Nova Pro 1.0 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 8 boards here | |||
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index212
| Benchmark | Nova Pro 1.0 | Qwen3 32B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| IFBench | 38.1% | 36.3% | Nova Pro 1.0 |
| Long context reasoning (AA-LCR) | 21.0% | 0.0% | Nova Pro 1.0 |
| DTBench | Not measured | 67.5% | Only Qwen3 32B measured |
| LMCA | Not measured | 17.3% | Only Qwen3 32B measured |
| Fiction.LiveBench | Not measured | 74.2% | Only Qwen3 32B measured |
| LMArena Text | 1259 | 1340 | Qwen3 32B |
| LMArena Text: instruction following | 1235 | 1305 | Qwen3 32B |
| LMArena Text: creative writing | 1212 | 1297 | Qwen3 32B |
| LMArena Vision | 980 | Not measured | Only Nova Pro 1.0 measured |
| LMArena Text: English | 1276 | 1359 | Qwen3 32B |
| LMArena Text: non-English | 1233 | 1317 | Qwen3 32B |
| LMArena Text: Chinese | 1244 | 1357 | Qwen3 32B |
| LMArena Text: German | 1243 | 1341 | Qwen3 32B |
| LMArena Text: Japanese | 1200 | Not measured | Only Nova Pro 1.0 measured |
| LMArena Text: Korean | 1203 | Not measured | Only Nova Pro 1.0 measured |
| LMArena Text: French | 1271 | Not measured | Only Nova Pro 1.0 measured |
| LMArena Text: Spanish | 1182 | Not measured | Only Nova Pro 1.0 measured |
| LMArena Text: Russian | 1240 | 1311 | Qwen3 32B |
| LMArena Text: multi-turn | 1246 | 1331 | Qwen3 32B |
| LMArena Text: longer queries | 1255 | 1327 | Qwen3 32B |
| LMArena Text: writing and language | 1247 | 1298 | Qwen3 32B |
| LMArena Text: entertainment and media | 1210 | 1279 | Qwen3 32B |
| LMArena Vision: English | 987 | Not measured | Only Nova Pro 1.0 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 23 boards here | |||
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Nova Pro 1.0 | Qwen3 32B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Neither model has a result on 5 boards here | |||
What each workload costs
Three fixed token mixes at each model's listed price, so per-token rates become a bill.
Chat turn
1K input + 500 output tokens
Qwen3 32B costs less
Repository review
50K input + 3K output tokens
Qwen3 32B costs less
Agent loop
200K input + 10K output tokens
Qwen3 32B costs less
Listed OpenRouter rates, without cache or batch discounts. A workload that does not fit a model's context window would need splitting.
Specification differences
The leading value in a row is marked; a row with a missing value names no leader. Our two rows are marked in red.
| Specification | Amazon Nova Pro 1.0 | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | Amazon | Qwen |
| Weights | No public weights listed | Open weights |
| Released | December 5, 2024 | April 28, 2025 |
| Context window | 300K | 131K |
| Input $/Mtok | $0.80 | $0.14 |
| Output $/Mtok | $3.20 | $0.40 |
| Coding index | Not benchmarked | Not benchmarked |
| Independent measurements behind it | 0 | 0 |
| Cost per solved task | Not computable | Not computable |
| Source | OpenRouter listing | OpenRouter listing |
Questions
Is Nova Pro 1.0 better than Qwen3 32B for coding?
Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Nova Pro 1.0 for a larger context window (300K against 131K tokens) and work measured by LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run) or LMArena Text: coding, where it leads.
Which is cheaper, Nova Pro 1.0 or Qwen3 32B?
Nova Pro 1.0 costs $0.80 per million input tokens and $3.20 per million output tokens; Qwen3 32B costs $0.14 and $0.40. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.
Which has the bigger context window, Nova Pro 1.0 or Qwen3 32B?
Nova Pro 1.0, with 300K tokens against 131K.
How many benchmarks is the Nova Pro 1.0 vs Qwen3 32B comparison based on?
34 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. Nova Pro 1.0's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and Qwen3 32B's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.