Model Comparison

Claude 3 Opus vs Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking

Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Want to compare interactively?Try the playground

Performance Benchmarks

Comparative analysis across standard metrics

3 benchmarks

Claude 3 Opus outperforms in 0 benchmarks, while Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking is better at 3 benchmarks (GPQA, MMLU, MMLU-Pro).

Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Tue May 12 2026 • llm-stats.com

Arena Performance

Human preference votes

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

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

Claude 3 Opus

Input200,000 tokens

Output200,000 tokens

Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking

Input- tokens

Output- tokens

Tue May 12 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input Capabilities

Supported data types and modalities

Both Claude 3 Opus and Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking support multimodal inputs.

They are both capable of processing various types of data, offering versatility in application.

Claude 3 Opus

Text

Images

Audio

Video

Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking

Text

Images

Audio

Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Claude 3 Opus is licensed under a proprietary license, while Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking uses Apache 2.0.

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

Claude 3 Opus

Proprietary

Closed source

Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking

Apache 2.0

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Claude 3 Opus was released on 2024-02-29, while Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking was released on 2025-09-22.

Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking is 19 months newer than Claude 3 Opus.

Claude 3 Opus

Feb 29, 2024

2.2 years ago

Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking

Sep 22, 2025

7 months ago

1.6yr newer

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Neither model specifies a knowledge cutoff date.

Unable to compare the recency of their training data.

No cutoff dates available

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion→

Key Takeaways

Claude 3 Opus

View details

Anthropic

Larger context window (200,000 tokens)

Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking

View details

Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team

Has open weights

Higher GPQA score (73.1% vs 50.4%)

Higher MMLU score (88.7% vs 86.8%)

Higher MMLU-Pro score (82.1% vs 68.5%)

Detailed Comparison

AI Model Comparison Table
Feature	Claude 3 Opus	Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking

FAQ

Common questions about Claude 3 Opus vs Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking.

Which is better, Claude 3 Opus or Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking?

Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking significantly outperforms across most benchmarks. Claude 3 Opus is made by Anthropic and Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking 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 Opus compare to Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking in benchmarks?

Claude 3 Opus scores ARC-C: 96.4%, HellaSwag: 95.4%, GSM8k: 95.0%, MGSM: 90.7%, BIG-Bench Hard: 86.8%. Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking scores DocVQAtest: 96.1%, ScreenSpot: 95.7%, MMLU-Redux: 91.9%, MMBench-V1.1: 90.8%, CharXiv-D: 90.2%.

What are the context window sizes for Claude 3 Opus and Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking?

Claude 3 Opus supports 200K tokens and Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking 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 Opus and Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking?

Key differences include licensing (Proprietary vs Apache 2.0). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Claude 3 Opus and Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking?

Claude 3 Opus is developed by Anthropic and Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking is developed by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team.