The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Claude Sonnet 5.5 vs QwQ-32B-Preview

Claude Sonnet 5.5 leads the LLM Stats Score 58.0 to 9.0. QwQ-32B-Preview is 24.6x cheaper per token.

Anthropic · Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Claude Sonnet 5.5 leads the overall LLM Stats Score 58.0 to 9.0, ranking #3 overall.

On price, QwQ-32B-Preview is roughly 24.6x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.

Claude Sonnet 5.5 also accepts a larger context window (1,000,000 input tokens), making it the stronger choice for long documents and large codebases.

Based on current LLM Stats indexes, shared benchmarks, pricing, and model metadata for 2026.

Choose Claude Sonnet 5.5

  • overall performance matters — it scores 58.0 and ranks #3 on LLM Stats
  • your work emphasizes reasoning and coding — it leads those capability indexes
  • you process long inputs — it offers a 1,000,000 token context window
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Sep 2026

Choose QwQ-32B-Preview

  • cost matters — it's about 24.6x cheaper per token
  • you need open weights you can self-host or fine-tune

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Claude Sonnet 5.5
Anthropic
QwQ-32B-Preview
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
58.0
#3
9.0
#280
Reasoning
56.6
#3
9.3
#270
Coding
48.8
#2
4.4
#215
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
—
—
Input price
$2.00 / M
$0.15 / M
Output price
$10.00 / M
$0.20 / M
Context window
1,000,000
32,768

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

1 shared
Index
Claude Sonnet 5.5
QwQ-32B-Preview
Math
36.9#34
8.9#257
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

47 reported for Claude Sonnet 5.5 · 4 for QwQ-32B-Preview

No common benchmarks found

Claude Sonnet 5.5 and QwQ-32B-Previewdon't have any common benchmark datasets to compare. They may have been evaluated on different testing suites.

Human preference

Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

QwQ-32B-Preview costs less

For input processing, Claude Sonnet 5.5 ($2.00/1M tokens) is 13.3x more expensive than QwQ-32B-Preview ($0.15/1M tokens).

For output processing, Claude Sonnet 5.5 ($10.00/1M tokens) is 50.0x more expensive than QwQ-32B-Preview ($0.20/1M tokens).

In conclusion, Claude Sonnet 5.5 is more expensive than QwQ-32B-Preview.*

* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens

Lowest available price from all providers
Wed Sep 30 2026 • llm-stats.com
Anthropic
Claude Sonnet 5.5
Input tokens$2.00
Output tokens$10.00
Best providerAnthropic
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
QwQ-32B-Preview
Input tokens$0.15
Output tokens$0.20
Best providerDeepinfra
Notice missing or incorrect data?

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Claude Sonnet 5.5 accepts 1,000,000 input tokens compared to QwQ-32B-Preview's 32,768 tokens. Claude Sonnet 5.5 can generate longer responses up to 128,000 tokens, while QwQ-32B-Preview is limited to 32,768 tokens.

Anthropic
Claude Sonnet 5.5
Input1,000,000 tokens
Output128,000 tokens
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
QwQ-32B-Preview
Input32,768 tokens
Output32,768 tokens
Wed Sep 30 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

Claude Sonnet 5.5 supports multimodal inputs, whereas QwQ-32B-Preview does not.

Claude Sonnet 5.5 can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.

Claude Sonnet 5.5

Text
Images
Audio
Video

QwQ-32B-Preview

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Claude Sonnet 5.5 is licensed under a proprietary license, while QwQ-32B-Preview uses Apache 2.0.

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

Claude Sonnet 5.5

Proprietary

Closed source

QwQ-32B-Preview

Apache 2.0

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Claude Sonnet 5.5 was released on 2026-09-28, while QwQ-32B-Preview was released on 2024-11-28.

Claude Sonnet 5.5 is 22 months newer than QwQ-32B-Preview.

Claude Sonnet 5.5

Sep 28, 2026

1 days ago

1.8yr newer
QwQ-32B-Preview

Nov 28, 2024

1.8 years ago

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Claude Sonnet 5.5 has a knowledge cutoff of 2026-06-01, while QwQ-32B-Preview has a cutoff of 2024-11-28.

Claude Sonnet 5.5 has more recent training data (up to 2026-06-01), making it potentially better informed about events through that date compared to QwQ-32B-Preview (2024-11-28).

Claude Sonnet 5.5

Jun 2026

1.6 yr newer
QwQ-32B-Preview

Nov 2024

Provider Availability

Claude Sonnet 5.5 is available from Anthropic. QwQ-32B-Preview is available from DeepInfra, Hyperbolic, Fireworks, Together.

Claude Sonnet 5.5

anthropic logo
Anthropic
Input Price:Input: $2.00/1MOutput Price:Output: $10.00/1M

QwQ-32B-Preview

deepinfra logo
Deepinfra
Input Price:Input: $0.15/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.60/1M
hyperbolic logo
Hyperbolic
Input Price:Input: $0.20/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.20/1M
fireworks logo
Fireworks
Input Price:Input: $0.89/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.89/1M
together logo
Together
Input Price:Input: $1.20/1MOutput Price:Output: $1.20/1M
* Prices shown are per million tokens

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against Claude Sonnet 5.5 and QwQ-32B-Preview side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Claude Sonnet 5.5
✓ Preferred
QwQ-32B-Preview
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Claude Sonnet 5.5 vs QwQ-32B-Preview.

Which is better, Claude Sonnet 5.5 or QwQ-32B-Preview?

Claude Sonnet 5.5 leads the LLM Stats Score 58.0 to 9.0. Claude Sonnet 5.5 is made by Anthropic and QwQ-32B-Preview is made by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their capability indexes, individual benchmarks, pricing, and limits above.

How does Claude Sonnet 5.5 compare to QwQ-32B-Preview in benchmarks?

Claude Sonnet 5.5 scores BenchCAD (with Python tool): 96.3%, ArXivMath (with tools): 95.2%, Global-MMLU: 92.1%, MILU: 91.6%, SWE-bench Multilingual: 90.3%. QwQ-32B-Preview scores MATH-500: 90.6%, GPQA: 65.2%, AIME 2024: 50.0%, LiveCodeBench: 50.0%.

Is Claude Sonnet 5.5 cheaper than QwQ-32B-Preview?

QwQ-32B-Preview is 13.3x cheaper for input tokens. Claude Sonnet 5.5 costs $2.00/M input and $10.00/M output via anthropic. QwQ-32B-Preview costs $0.15/M input and $0.20/M output via deepinfra.

What are the context window sizes for Claude Sonnet 5.5 and QwQ-32B-Preview?

Claude Sonnet 5.5 supports 1.0M tokens and QwQ-32B-Preview supports 33K tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.

What are the main differences between Claude Sonnet 5.5 and QwQ-32B-Preview?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (58.0 vs 9.0), context window (1.0M vs 33K), input pricing ($2.00 vs $0.15/M), multimodal support (yes vs no), licensing (Proprietary vs Apache 2.0). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Claude Sonnet 5.5 and QwQ-32B-Preview?

Claude Sonnet 5.5 is developed by Anthropic and QwQ-32B-Preview is developed by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team.

Related comparisons