Model comparison
Qwen3 32B vs Sonar
Qwen3 32B and Sonar score almost the same on the Noometry Index (39.2 vs 38.5), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)
PerplexitySummary
- The widest gap is in math, where Qwen3 32B leads 39.7 to 33.7.
- Sonar is cheaper at $1 / $1 per million input/output tokens, against $0.70 / $2.80 for Qwen3 32B.
- Qwen3 32B accepts more context: 131K tokens versus 128K.
- Qwen3 32B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Qwen3 32B | Sonar | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | Perplexity |
| Noometry Index | 39.2 | 38.5 |
| Released | 2025-04 | 2024-01-01 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | 131K | 128K |
| Max output | 16K | 4K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.70 | $1 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $2.80 | $1 |
| Results tracked | 26 | 7 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Qwen3 32B leads
Qwen3 32B: 37.7 (#190), Sonar: 35.7 (#221)
| Benchmark | Qwen3 32B | Sonar |
|---|---|---|
| Aider Polyglot | 40% | — |
| SciCode | 35.4% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | — | 35.1% |
| LMArena Coding | 1358 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Qwen3 32B: 32.6 (#62), Sonar: —
| Benchmark | Qwen3 32B | Sonar |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 48.7% | — |
Reasoning Too close to call
Qwen3 32B: 20.2 (#241), Sonar: 21.1 (#227)
| Benchmark | Qwen3 32B | Sonar |
|---|---|---|
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 54.9% | — |
| CritPt | 0.3% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 5% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | — | 46.3% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1334 | — |
| DTBench | 67.5% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | — | 37.9% |
| LMCA | 17.3% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 138.51 | — |
| LiveBench | — | 46.9% |
Math Qwen3 32B leads
Qwen3 32B: 39.7 (#99), Sonar: 33.7 (#200)
| Benchmark | Qwen3 32B | Sonar |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 66.9% | — |
| LiveBench Math | — | 41.6% |
| LMArena Math | 1399 | — |
Knowledge Not comparable
Qwen3 32B: 40.0 (#125), Sonar: —
| Benchmark | Qwen3 32B | Sonar |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 65.7% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 5.9% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1362 | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
Qwen3 32B: 45.6 (#167), Sonar: —
| Benchmark | Qwen3 32B | Sonar |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1317 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1357 | — |
| LMArena German | 1341 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1311 | — |
Instruction Following Sonar leads
Qwen3 32B: 68.9 (#179), Sonar: 71.4 (#150)
| Benchmark | Qwen3 32B | Sonar |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Instruction Following | — | 76.2% |
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1305 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
Qwen3 32B: 43.8 (#87), Sonar: —
| Benchmark | Qwen3 32B | Sonar |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | 74.2% | — |
| LMArena Longer Query | 1327 | — |
Writing & Preference Too close to call
Qwen3 32B: 52.9 (#163), Sonar: 52.6 (#167)
| Benchmark | Qwen3 32B | Sonar |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1340 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1297 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1331 | — |
| LiveBench Language | — | 44.1% |
Frequently asked questions
Is Qwen3 32B better than Sonar?
Qwen3 32B and Sonar score almost the same on the Noometry Index (39.2 vs 38.5), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Which is cheaper, Qwen3 32B or Sonar?
Sonar is cheaper. It lists at $1 per million input tokens and $1 per million output tokens; Qwen3 32B lists at $0.70 and $2.80.
Is Qwen3 32B or Sonar better for coding?
Qwen3 32B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 37.7 versus 35.7 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Qwen3 32B does, with 131K tokens against 128K.
How many benchmarks do Qwen3 32B and Sonar share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Qwen3 32B has 26 scored results on Noometry and Sonar has 7.