Noometry

Model comparison

Claude Opus 5.5 vs Qwen3 32B

Claude Opus 5.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 68.6 to 39.2 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3 32B costs 6.5× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 5.5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 19 shared benchmarks.

Claude Opus 5.5 Anthropic

68.6

Rank #3 Confirmed

Qwen3 32B Alibaba (Qwen)

39.2

Rank #172 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 19 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 5.5 scores higher in 9 categories and Qwen3 32B in 0 categories; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where Claude Opus 5.5 leads 80.2 to 20.2.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is LMCA: 68.2% for Claude Opus 5.5 and 17.3% for Qwen3 32B.
  • Qwen3 32B is cheaper at $0.70 / $2.80 per million input/output tokens, against $4 / $20 for Claude Opus 5.5.
  • Claude Opus 5.5 accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 131K.
  • Qwen3 32B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Claude Opus 5.5Qwen3 32B
ProviderAnthropicAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index68.639.2
Released2026-09-222025-04
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1M131K
Max output128K16K
Input $ / M tokens$4$0.70
Output $ / M tokens$20$2.80
Results tracked4426

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 71.9 (#3), Qwen3 32B: 37.7 (#190)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen3 32B
SciCode66.9%35.4%
LMArena Coding15471358
FrontierCode54.6%—
Aider Polyglot—40%
CursorBench57.8%—
LMArena WebDev1813—
FrontierSWE62.3%—
MirrorCode77.4%—
ALE-Bench2,147—

Agentic & Tool Use Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 45.3 (#15), Qwen3 32B: 32.6 (#62)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen3 32B
APEX-Agents73.5%—
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard—48.7%
GDP.pdf30.6%—
Vending-Bench 29,235—

Reasoning Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 80.2 (#3), Qwen3 32B: 20.2 (#241)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen3 32B
CritPt31.7%0.3%
LMArena Hard Prompts15351334
DTBench98.9%67.5%
LMCA68.2%17.3%
Epoch Capabilities Index167.33138.51
ARC-AGI-293.3%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark—54.9%
NYT Connections (extended)88.5%—
ARC-AGI-198.5%—
Chess Puzzles—5%
EBR-Bench71.4%—
Mystery Game Puzzles71%—

Math Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 91.8 (#3), Qwen3 32B: 39.7 (#99)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen3 32B
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025100%66.9%
LMArena Math15061399
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)91.2%—
FrontierMath Tier 495%—
ProofBench100%—
FrontierMath Erdős2.9%—

Knowledge Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 66.4 (#10), Qwen3 32B: 40.0 (#125)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen3 32B
GPQA Diamond90.6%65.7%
LMArena Expert15471362
SimpleQA Verified72.2%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate—5.9%

Multimodal Not comparable

Claude Opus 5.5: 57.8 (#1), Qwen3 32B: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen3 32B
LMArena Vision1321—
Blueprint-Bench 251.2%—
Furniture Assembly83.3%—

Multilingual Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 59.1 (#2), Qwen3 32B: 45.6 (#167)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen3 32B
LMArena Non-English15071317
LMArena Chinese15881357
LMArena Russian15201311
LMArena French1514—
LMArena German—1341
LMArena Spanish1507—

Instruction Following Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 80.0 (#3), Qwen3 32B: 68.9 (#179)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen3 32B
LMArena Instruction Following15371305

Long Context Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 47.1 (#19), Qwen3 32B: 43.8 (#87)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen3 32B
LMArena Longer Query15321327
Fiction.LiveBench—74.2%

Writing & Preference Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 78.2 (#3), Qwen3 32B: 52.9 (#163)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen3 32B
LMArena Text15151340
LMArena Creative Writing15331297
LMArena Multi-Turn14991331
EQ-Bench Creative Writing2050—

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Opus 5.5 better than Qwen3 32B?

Claude Opus 5.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 68.6 to 39.2 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3 32B costs 6.5× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 5.5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 5.5 or Qwen3 32B?

Qwen3 32B is cheaper. It lists at $0.70 per million input tokens and $2.80 per million output tokens; Claude Opus 5.5 lists at $4 and $20.

Is Claude Opus 5.5 or Qwen3 32B better for coding?

Claude Opus 5.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 71.9 versus 37.7 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Claude Opus 5.5 does, with 1M tokens against 131K.

How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 5.5 and Qwen3 32B share?

19 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 5.5 has 44 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3 32B has 26.

Related comparisons

Go deeper