Model Comparison

Claude 3 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 Haiku outperforms in 0 benchmarks, while QwQ-32B is better at 1 benchmark (GPQA).

QwQ-32B significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Tue May 05 2026 • llm-stats.com

Arena Performance

Human preference votes

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Only Claude 3 Haiku specifies input context (200,000 tokens). Only Claude 3 Haiku specifies output context (200,000 tokens).

Anthropic
Claude 3 Haiku
Input200,000 tokens
Output200,000 tokens
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
QwQ-32B
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
Tue May 05 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input Capabilities

Supported data types and modalities

Claude 3 Haiku supports multimodal inputs, whereas QwQ-32B does not.

Claude 3 Haiku can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.

Claude 3 Haiku

Text
Images
Audio
Video

QwQ-32B

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Claude 3 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 Haiku

Proprietary

Closed source

QwQ-32B

Apache 2.0

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Claude 3 Haiku was released on 2024-03-13, while QwQ-32B was released on 2025-03-05.

QwQ-32B is 12 months newer than Claude 3 Haiku.

Claude 3 Haiku

Mar 13, 2024

2.1 years ago

QwQ-32B

Mar 5, 2025

1.2 years ago

11mo newer

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

QwQ-32B has a documented knowledge cutoff of 2024-11-28, while Claude 3 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 Haiku's cutoff date.

Claude 3 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)
Supports multimodal inputs
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team

QwQ-32B

View details

Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team

Has open weights
Higher GPQA score (65.2% vs 33.3%)

Detailed Comparison

AI Model Comparison Table
Feature
Anthropic
Claude 3 Haiku
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
QwQ-32B

FAQ

Common questions about Claude 3 Haiku vs QwQ-32B.

Which is better, Claude 3 Haiku or QwQ-32B?

QwQ-32B significantly outperforms across most benchmarks. Claude 3 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.

How does Claude 3 Haiku compare to QwQ-32B in benchmarks?

Claude 3 Haiku scores ARC-C: 89.2%, GSM8k: 88.9%, HellaSwag: 85.9%, DROP: 78.4%, HumanEval: 75.9%. QwQ-32B scores MATH-500: 90.6%, IFEval: 83.9%, AIME 2024: 79.5%, LiveBench: 73.1%, BFCL: 66.4%.

What are the context window sizes for Claude 3 Haiku and QwQ-32B?

Claude 3 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.

What are the main differences between Claude 3 Haiku and QwQ-32B?

Key differences include multimodal support (yes vs no), licensing (Proprietary vs Apache 2.0). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Claude 3 Haiku and QwQ-32B?

Claude 3 Haiku is developed by Anthropic and QwQ-32B is developed by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team.