Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Qwen3 32B vs Beam 1.0 501B A23B

Qwen3 32B costs 2.8x less per output token than Beam 1.0 501B A23B ($0.40 vs $1.10 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 22 benchmarks have a result for both.

Qwen3 32BQwen
Coding
No data
Overall
40.8
Output $/M
$0.40
0
R Beam 1.0 501B A23BReflection
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$1.10
22
vs boards won of 22 shared

Qwen3 32B or Beam 1.0 501B A23B: which to pick

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick Qwen3 32B for output tokens 2.8x cheaper ($0.40 vs $1.10 per million) and work measured by LMArena Text: coding or LMArena Text: software and IT, where it leads.

Shared results
22
Qwen3 32B only
23
Beam 1.0 501B A23B only
6
Like-for-like categories
5 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.

At a glance

Coding index
Qwen3 32B not benchmarked, Beam 1.0 501B A23B not benchmarked.
Widest category
Coding, 17.5 points apart on average over 2 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
LMArena Text: instruction following: Qwen3 32B 1305 against Beam 1.0 501B A23B 1430, 20.9 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Qwen3 32B $0.40 against Beam 1.0 501B A23B $1.10 per million output tokens, 2.8x apart.
Context window
Qwen3 32B takes 131K tokens, Beam 1.0 501B A23B 1.05M.

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.

Boards won, where both have a result
CategoryQwen3 32BBarsBeam 1.0 501B A23BTies
Coding02
Reasoning03
Math02
Knowledge04
General011
All shared boards022
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index02
Coding benchmarks for Qwen3 32B and Beam 1.0 501B A23B
BenchmarkQwen3 32BBeam 1.0 501B A23BLeader
Aider polyglot40.0%Not measuredOnly Qwen3 32B measured
LMArena WebDevNot measured1437Only Beam 1.0 501B A23B measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)54.6%Not measuredOnly Qwen3 32B measured
SciCode36.0%Not measuredOnly Qwen3 32B measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)3.0%Not measuredOnly Qwen3 32B measured
LMArena Text: coding13571473Beam 1.0 501B A23B
LMArena Text: software and IT13661461Beam 1.0 501B A23B
LMArena WebDev: ReactNot measured1443Only Beam 1.0 501B A23B measured
LMArena WebDev: HTMLNot measured1436Only Beam 1.0 501B A23B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 30 boards here
IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards, none shared
Intelligence benchmarks for Qwen3 32B and Beam 1.0 501B A23B
BenchmarkQwen3 32BBeam 1.0 501B A23BLeader
AA Intelligence Index7.3Not measuredOnly Qwen3 32B measured
Epoch Capabilities Index138.4Not measuredOnly Qwen3 32B measured
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index3 boards, none shared
Agentic work benchmarks for Qwen3 32B and Beam 1.0 501B A23B
BenchmarkQwen3 32BBeam 1.0 501B A23BLeader
τ²-Bench Telecom29.8%Not measuredOnly Qwen3 32B measured
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL)48.7%Not measuredOnly Qwen3 32B measured
BrowseComp-Plus10.7%Not measuredOnly 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 index03
Reasoning benchmarks for Qwen3 32B and Beam 1.0 501B A23B
BenchmarkQwen3 32BBeam 1.0 501B A23BLeader
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)66.8%Not measuredOnly Qwen3 32B measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)7.4%Not measuredOnly Qwen3 32B measured
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)65.7%Not measuredOnly Qwen3 32B measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts13341442Beam 1.0 501B A23B
LMArena Text: expert13621447Beam 1.0 501B A23B
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English13501451Beam 1.0 501B A23B
Kagi LLM Benchmark48.7%Not measuredOnly Qwen3 32B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 15 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
Math benchmarks for Qwen3 32B and Beam 1.0 501B A23B
BenchmarkQwen3 32BBeam 1.0 501B A23BLeader
AA Math Index73.0Not measuredOnly Qwen3 32B measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)73.0%Not measuredOnly Qwen3 32B measured
OTIS Mock AIME66.9%Not measuredOnly Qwen3 32B measured
LMArena Text: math13991459Beam 1.0 501B A23B
LMArena Text: mathematical work14201475Beam 1.0 501B A23B
Neither model has a result on the other 8 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index04
Knowledge benchmarks for Qwen3 32B and Beam 1.0 501B A23B
BenchmarkQwen3 32BBeam 1.0 501B A23BLeader
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)79.8%Not measuredOnly Qwen3 32B measured
LMArena Text: science13721430Beam 1.0 501B A23B
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare13681376Beam 1.0 501B A23B
LMArena Text: legal and government13241433Beam 1.0 501B A23B
LMArena Text: business and finance13181430Beam 1.0 501B A23B
Neither model has a result on the other 13 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for Qwen3 32B and Beam 1.0 501B A23B
BenchmarkQwen3 32BBeam 1.0 501B A23BLeader
Design Arena: websitesNot measured1250Only Beam 1.0 501B A23B measured
Design Arena: game devNot measured1224Only Beam 1.0 501B A23B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 7 boards here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index011
General benchmarks for Qwen3 32B and Beam 1.0 501B A23B
BenchmarkQwen3 32BBeam 1.0 501B A23BLeader
IFBench36.3%Not measuredOnly Qwen3 32B measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)0.0%Not measuredOnly Qwen3 32B measured
DTBench67.5%Not measuredOnly Qwen3 32B measured
LMCA17.3%Not measuredOnly Qwen3 32B measured
Fiction.LiveBench74.2%Not measuredOnly Qwen3 32B measured
LMArena Text13401425Beam 1.0 501B A23B
LMArena Text: instruction following13051430Beam 1.0 501B A23B
LMArena Text: creative writing12971390Beam 1.0 501B A23B
LMArena Text: English13591436Beam 1.0 501B A23B
LMArena Text: non-English13171413Beam 1.0 501B A23B
LMArena Text: Chinese13571424Beam 1.0 501B A23B
LMArena Text: German1341Not measuredOnly Qwen3 32B measured
LMArena Text: FrenchNot measured1461Only Beam 1.0 501B A23B measured
LMArena Text: Russian13111412Beam 1.0 501B A23B
LMArena Text: multi-turn13311414Beam 1.0 501B A23B
LMArena Text: longer queries13271429Beam 1.0 501B A23B
LMArena Text: writing and language12981400Beam 1.0 501B A23B
LMArena Text: entertainment and media12791399Beam 1.0 501B A23B
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
Image generation benchmarks for Qwen3 32B and Beam 1.0 501B A23B
BenchmarkQwen3 32BBeam 1.0 501B A23BLeader
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$0.0003Fits in one request
Beam 1.0 501B A23B$0.0009Fits in one request

Qwen3 32B costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Qwen3 32B$0.0082Fits in one request
Beam 1.0 501B A23B$0.021Fits in one request

Qwen3 32B costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Qwen3 32B$0.032Exceeds the context window
Beam 1.0 501B A23B$0.081Fits in one request

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.

Specifications of Qwen3 32B and Beam 1.0 501B A23B
SpecificationQwen3 32BReflection Beam 1.0 501B A23B
MakerQwenReflection
WeightsOpen weightsOpen weights
ReleasedApril 28, 2025October 16, 2026
Context window131K1.05M
Input $/Mtok$0.14$0.35
Output $/Mtok$0.40$1.10
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it01
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Qwen3 32B better than Beam 1.0 501B A23B for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Qwen3 32B for output tokens 2.8x cheaper ($0.40 vs $1.10 per million) and work measured by LMArena Text: coding or LMArena Text: software and IT, where it leads.

Which is cheaper, Qwen3 32B or Beam 1.0 501B A23B?

Qwen3 32B costs $0.14 per million input tokens and $0.40 per million output tokens; Beam 1.0 501B A23B costs $0.35 and $1.10. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, Qwen3 32B or Beam 1.0 501B A23B?

Beam 1.0 501B A23B, with 1.05M tokens against 131K.

How many benchmarks is the Qwen3 32B vs Beam 1.0 501B A23B comparison based on?

22 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. Qwen3 32B's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and Beam 1.0 501B A23B's on 1. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next