Model Comparison

Claude 3.5 Haiku vs QwQ-32B

QwQ-32B significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Want to compare interactively?Try the playground

Performance Benchmarks

Comparative analysis across standard metrics

1 benchmarks

Claude 3.5 Haiku outperforms in 0 benchmarks, while QwQ-32B is better at 1 benchmark (GPQA).

QwQ-32B significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Sun Mar 29 2026 • llm-stats.com

Arena Performance

Human preference votes

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

Cost data unavailable.

Lowest available price from all providers
Sun Mar 29 2026 • llm-stats.com
Anthropic
Claude 3.5 Haiku
Input tokens$0.80
Output tokens$4.00
Best providerAWS Bedrock
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
QwQ-32B
Input tokens$0.00
Output tokens$0.00
Best providerUnknown Organization
Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue→

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Only Claude 3.5 Haiku specifies input context (200,000 tokens). Only Claude 3.5 Haiku specifies output context (200,000 tokens).

Anthropic
Claude 3.5 Haiku
Input200,000 tokens
Output200,000 tokens
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
QwQ-32B
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
Sun Mar 29 2026 • llm-stats.com

License

Usage and distribution terms

Claude 3.5 Haiku is licensed under a proprietary license, while QwQ-32B uses Apache 2.0.

License differences may affect how you can use these models in commercial or open-source projects.

Claude 3.5 Haiku

Proprietary

Closed source

QwQ-32B

Apache 2.0

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Claude 3.5 Haiku was released on 2024-10-22, while QwQ-32B was released on 2025-03-05.

QwQ-32B is 4 months newer than Claude 3.5 Haiku.

Claude 3.5 Haiku

Oct 22, 2024

1.4 years ago

QwQ-32B

Mar 5, 2025

1.1 years ago

4mo newer

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

QwQ-32B has a documented knowledge cutoff of 2024-11-28, while Claude 3.5 Haiku's cutoff date is not specified.

We can confirm QwQ-32B's training data extends to 2024-11-28, but cannot make a direct comparison without Claude 3.5 Haiku's cutoff date.

Claude 3.5 Haiku

—

QwQ-32B

Nov 2024

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion→

Key Takeaways

Anthropic
Larger context window (200,000 tokens)
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team

QwQ-32B

View details

Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team

Has open weights
Higher GPQA score (65.2% vs 41.6%)

Detailed Comparison

AI Model Comparison Table
Feature
Anthropic
Claude 3.5 Haiku
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
QwQ-32B

FAQ

Common questions about Claude 3.5 Haiku vs QwQ-32B

QwQ-32B significantly outperforms across most benchmarks. Claude 3.5 Haiku is made by Anthropic and QwQ-32B is made by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their benchmark scores, pricing, and capabilities above.
Claude 3.5 Haiku scores HumanEval: 88.1%, MGSM: 85.6%, DROP: 83.1%, MATH: 69.4%, MMLU-Pro: 65.0%. QwQ-32B scores MATH-500: 90.6%, IFEval: 83.9%, AIME 2024: 79.5%, LiveBench: 73.1%, BFCL: 66.4%.
Claude 3.5 Haiku supports 200K tokens and QwQ-32B supports an unknown number of tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.
Key differences include licensing (Proprietary vs Apache 2.0). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.
Claude 3.5 Haiku is developed by Anthropic and QwQ-32B is developed by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team.