Model Comparison

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

QwQ-32B significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Wed Apr 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
Wed Apr 29 2026 • llm-stats.com
Anthropic
Claude 3 Opus
Input tokens$15.00
Output tokens$75.00
Best providerAnthropic
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 Opus specifies input context (200,000 tokens). Only Claude 3 Opus specifies output context (200,000 tokens).

Anthropic
Claude 3 Opus
Input200,000 tokens
Output200,000 tokens
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
QwQ-32B
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
Wed Apr 29 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input Capabilities

Supported data types and modalities

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

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

Claude 3 Opus

Text
Images
Audio
Video

QwQ-32B

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Claude 3 Opus 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 Opus

Proprietary

Closed source

QwQ-32B

Apache 2.0

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Claude 3 Opus was released on 2024-02-29, while QwQ-32B was released on 2025-03-05.

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

Claude 3 Opus

Feb 29, 2024

2.2 years ago

QwQ-32B

Mar 5, 2025

1.2 years ago

1.0yr newer

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

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

Claude 3 Opus

—

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 50.4%)

Detailed Comparison

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

FAQ

Common questions about Claude 3 Opus vs QwQ-32B

QwQ-32B significantly outperforms across most benchmarks. Claude 3 Opus 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 Opus scores ARC-C: 96.4%, HellaSwag: 95.4%, GSM8k: 95.0%, MGSM: 90.7%, BIG-Bench Hard: 86.8%. QwQ-32B scores MATH-500: 90.6%, IFEval: 83.9%, AIME 2024: 79.5%, LiveBench: 73.1%, BFCL: 66.4%.
Claude 3 Opus 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 multimodal support (yes vs no), licensing (Proprietary vs Apache 2.0). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.
Claude 3 Opus is developed by Anthropic and QwQ-32B is developed by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team.