Qwen-Plus vs Qwen3 32B
Updated October 21, 2026. 26 benchmarks have a result for both. Coding is ranked on the Vibe Coding Index; every other board is shown as published.
Decision reading
Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.
Qwen-Plus has the edge where the context window is larger, 1M against 131K tokens, and where what matters is LMArena Text: coding or LMArena Text: software and IT, where it leads.
- Shared results
- 26
- Qwen-Plus only
- 2
- Qwen3 32B only
- 16
- Like-for-like categories
- 5 of 9
Shared results can support a head-to-head reading. Results only one model has describe coverage, not superiority.
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
No call
Only Qwen3 32B has a AA Intelligence Index result, 7.3.
Directional only
Long documents
Listed context window
Qwen-Plus
Qwen-Plus takes 1M tokens against 131K.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Qwen3 32B
Qwen-Plus $0.0006, Qwen3 32B $0.0003 per turn.
List prices
At a glance
- Coding index
- Qwen-Plus not benchmarked, Qwen3 32B not benchmarked.
- Widest category
- Math, 25.3 points apart on average over 3 shared benchmarks.
- Widest single gap
- OTIS Mock AIME: Qwen-Plus 17.8% against Qwen3 32B 66.9%, 49.2 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
- Output price
- Qwen-Plus $0.78 against Qwen3 32B $0.40 per million output tokens, 1.9x apart.
- Context window
- Qwen-Plus takes 1M 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 | Qwen-Plus | Bars | Qwen3 32B | Ties |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | 0 | 2 | ||
| Reasoning | 0 | 4 | ||
| Math | 0 | 3 | ||
| Knowledge | 1 | 3 | ||
| General | 4 | 9 | ||
| All shared boards | 5 | 21 |
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index02
| Benchmark | Qwen-Plus | Qwen3 32B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aider polyglot | Not measured | 40.0% | Only Qwen3 32B measured |
| LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 54.6% | Only Qwen3 32B measured |
| SciCode | Not measured | 36.0% | Only Qwen3 32B measured |
| Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 3.0% | Only Qwen3 32B measured |
| LMArena Text: coding | 1328 | 1357 | Qwen3 32B |
| LMArena Text: software and IT | 1343 | 1366 | Qwen3 32B |
| Neither model has a result on the other 32 boards here | |||
IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Qwen-Plus | Qwen3 32B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | Not measured | 7.3 | Only Qwen3 32B measured |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | Not measured | 138.4 | Only Qwen3 32B measured |
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board, none shared
| Benchmark | Qwen-Plus | Qwen3 32B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| τ²-Bench Telecom | Not measured | 29.8% | Only Qwen3 32B measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 38 boards here | |||
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index04
| Benchmark | Qwen-Plus | Qwen3 32B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 66.8% | Only Qwen3 32B measured |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 7.4% | Only Qwen3 32B measured |
| GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run) | 48.1% | 65.7% | Qwen3 32B |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts | 1317 | 1334 | Qwen3 32B |
| LMArena Text: expert | 1328 | 1362 | Qwen3 32B |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts in English | 1333 | 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 index03
| Benchmark | Qwen-Plus | Qwen3 32B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Math Index | Not measured | 73.0 | Only Qwen3 32B measured |
| AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 73.0% | Only Qwen3 32B measured |
| OTIS Mock AIME | 17.8% | 66.9% | Qwen3 32B |
| MATH level 5 | 65.3% | Not measured | Only Qwen-Plus measured |
| LMArena Text: math | 1326 | 1399 | Qwen3 32B |
| LMArena Text: mathematical work | 1332 | 1420 | Qwen3 32B |
| Neither model has a result on the other 7 boards here | |||
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index13
| Benchmark | Qwen-Plus | Qwen3 32B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 79.8% | Only Qwen3 32B measured |
| LMArena Text: science | 1352 | 1372 | Qwen3 32B |
| LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare | 1350 | 1368 | Qwen3 32B |
| LMArena Text: legal and government | 1349 | 1324 | Qwen-Plus |
| LMArena Text: business and finance | 1303 | 1318 | Qwen3 32B |
| Neither model has a result on the other 12 boards here | |||
Web designNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Qwen-Plus | Qwen3 32B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Neither model has a result on 9 boards here | |||
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index49
| Benchmark | Qwen-Plus | Qwen3 32B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| IFBench | Not measured | 36.3% | Only Qwen3 32B measured |
| Long context reasoning (AA-LCR) | Not measured | 0.0% | Only Qwen3 32B measured |
| DTBench | 81.1% | 67.5% | Qwen-Plus |
| LMCA | 24.0% | 17.3% | Qwen-Plus |
| Fiction.LiveBench | Not measured | 74.2% | Only Qwen3 32B measured |
| LMArena Text | 1326 | 1340 | Qwen3 32B |
| LMArena Text: instruction following | 1303 | 1305 | Qwen3 32B |
| LMArena Text: creative writing | 1292 | 1297 | Qwen3 32B |
| LMArena Text: English | 1339 | 1359 | Qwen3 32B |
| LMArena Text: non-English | 1310 | 1317 | Qwen3 32B |
| LMArena Text: Chinese | 1347 | 1357 | Qwen3 32B |
| LMArena Text: German | Not measured | 1341 | Only Qwen3 32B measured |
| LMArena Text: Japanese | 1251 | Not measured | Only Qwen-Plus measured |
| LMArena Text: Russian | 1323 | 1311 | Qwen-Plus |
| LMArena Text: multi-turn | 1336 | 1331 | Qwen-Plus |
| LMArena Text: longer queries | 1324 | 1327 | Qwen3 32B |
| LMArena Text: writing and language | 1296 | 1298 | Qwen3 32B |
| LMArena Text: entertainment and media | 1270 | 1279 | Qwen3 32B |
| Neither model has a result on the other 28 boards here | |||
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Qwen-Plus | 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 | Qwen-Plus | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | Qwen | Qwen |
| Weights | No public weights listed | Open weights |
| Released | February 1, 2025 | April 28, 2025 |
| Context window | 1M | 131K |
| Input $/Mtok | $0.26 | $0.14 |
| Output $/Mtok | $0.78 | $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 Qwen-Plus better than Qwen3 32B for coding?
Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Qwen-Plus has the edge where the context window is larger, 1M against 131K tokens, and where what matters is LMArena Text: coding or LMArena Text: software and IT, where it leads.
Which is cheaper, Qwen-Plus or Qwen3 32B?
Qwen-Plus costs $0.26 per million input tokens and $0.78 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, Qwen-Plus or Qwen3 32B?
Qwen-Plus, with 1M tokens against 131K.
How many benchmarks is the Qwen-Plus vs Qwen3 32B comparison based on?
26 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. Qwen-Plus'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.