ERNIE 5.5 Flash Preview vs QwQ-32B-Preview
ERNIE 5.5 Flash Preview leads the LLM Stats Score 52.3 to 8.4. QwQ-32B-Preview is 3.0x cheaper per token.
Baidu · Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team · Updated for 2026
Which is better?
ERNIE 5.5 Flash Preview leads the overall LLM Stats Score 52.3 to 8.4, ranking #13 overall.
On price, QwQ-32B-Preview is roughly 3.0x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.
ERNIE 5.5 Flash Preview also accepts a larger context window (1,048,576 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 ERNIE 5.5 Flash Preview
- overall performance matters — it scores 52.3 and ranks #13 on LLM Stats
- your work emphasizes reasoning and coding — it leads those capability indexes
- you process long inputs — it offers a 1,048,576 token context window
- you want the most recent training data — it shipped Nov 2026
Choose QwQ-32B-Preview
- cost matters — it's about 3.0x cheaper per token
- you need open weights you can self-host or fine-tune
At a glance
The differences that matter most.
Individual benchmarks
13 reported for ERNIE 5.5 Flash Preview · 4 for QwQ-32B-Preview
ERNIE 5.5 Flash Preview 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
For input processing, ERNIE 5.5 Flash Preview ($0.28/1M tokens) is 1.9x more expensive than QwQ-32B-Preview ($0.15/1M tokens).
For output processing, ERNIE 5.5 Flash Preview ($1.13/1M tokens) is 5.6x more expensive than QwQ-32B-Preview ($0.20/1M tokens).
In conclusion, ERNIE 5.5 Flash Preview is more expensive than QwQ-32B-Preview.*
* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens
Model Size
Parameter count comparison
ERNIE 5.5 Flash Preview has 247.5B more parameters than QwQ-32B-Preview, making it 761.5% larger.
Context Window
Maximum input and output token capacity
ERNIE 5.5 Flash Preview accepts 1,048,576 input tokens compared to QwQ-32B-Preview's 32,768 tokens. ERNIE 5.5 Flash Preview can generate longer responses up to 1,048,576 tokens, while QwQ-32B-Preview is limited to 32,768 tokens.
License
Usage and distribution terms
ERNIE 5.5 Flash Preview 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.
Proprietary
Closed source
Apache 2.0
Open weights
Release Timeline
When each model was launched
ERNIE 5.5 Flash Preview was released on 2026-11-11, while QwQ-32B-Preview was released on 2024-11-28.
ERNIE 5.5 Flash Preview is 24 months newer than QwQ-32B-Preview.
Nov 11, 2026
1 days ago
2.0yr newerNov 28, 2024
2.0 years ago
Knowledge Cutoff
When training data ends
QwQ-32B-Preview has a documented knowledge cutoff of 2024-11-28, while ERNIE 5.5 Flash Preview's cutoff date is not specified.
We can confirm QwQ-32B-Preview's training data extends to 2024-11-28, but cannot make a direct comparison without ERNIE 5.5 Flash Preview's cutoff date.
—
Nov 2024
Provider Availability
ERNIE 5.5 Flash Preview is available from Baidu Qianfan. QwQ-32B-Preview is available from DeepInfra, Hyperbolic, Fireworks, Together.
ERNIE 5.5 Flash Preview
QwQ-32B-Preview
Outputs Comparison
Judge for yourself.
Run your own prompts against ERNIE 5.5 Flash Preview and QwQ-32B-Preview side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.
FAQ
Common questions about ERNIE 5.5 Flash Preview vs QwQ-32B-Preview.