The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Llama 4 Maverick vs Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking

Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking leads the LLM Stats Score 23.5 to 14.7.

Meta · Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking leads the overall LLM Stats Score 23.5 to 14.7, ranking #180 overall.

In the 4 individual benchmarks reported for both models, Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking wins 4; this is a narrower head-to-head signal than the composite indexes.

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

Choose Llama 4 Maverick

  • you want predictable pricing at $0.17/M input and $0.60/M output

Choose Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking

  • overall performance matters — it scores 23.5 and ranks #180 on LLM Stats
  • your work emphasizes reasoning — it leads those capability indexes
  • you value its reported benchmark strengths — it wins 4 of 4 exact shared results
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Sep 2025

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Llama 4 Maverick
Meta
Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
14.7
#240
23.5
#180
Reasoning
14.3
#236
24.7
#160
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
0 of 4
4 of 4
Input price
$0.17 / M
— / M
Output price
$0.60 / M
— / M
Context window
1,000,000
—

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

5 shared
Index
Llama 4 Maverick
Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking
Math
20.4#158
25.4#110
Vision
12.4#106
16.9#90
Multimodal
15.7#91
19.5#77
Finance
18.9#91
27.8#37
Legal
18.9#76
27.1#28
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

13 reported for Llama 4 Maverick · 47 for Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking

4 shared

Llama 4 Maverick outperforms in 0 benchmarks, while Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking is better at 4 benchmarks (GPQA, MMLU, MMLU-Pro, MMMU-Pro).

Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Wed Sep 23 2026 • llm-stats.com

Human preference

Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores

Model Size

Parameter count comparison

367.0B diff

Llama 4 Maverick has 367.0B more parameters than Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking, making it 1112.1% larger.

Meta
Llama 4 Maverick
400.0Bparameters
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking
33.0Bparameters
400.0B
Llama 4 Maverick
33.0B
Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Only Llama 4 Maverick specifies input context (1,000,000 tokens). Only Llama 4 Maverick specifies output context (1,000,000 tokens).

Meta
Llama 4 Maverick
Input1,000,000 tokens
Output1,000,000 tokens
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
Wed Sep 23 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

Both Llama 4 Maverick and Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking support multimodal inputs.

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

Llama 4 Maverick

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Llama 4 Maverick is licensed under Llama 4 Community License Agreement, 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.

Llama 4 Maverick

Llama 4 Community License Agreement

Open weights

Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking

Apache 2.0

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Llama 4 Maverick was released on 2025-04-05, while Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking was released on 2025-09-22.

Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking is 6 months newer than Llama 4 Maverick.

Llama 4 Maverick

Apr 5, 2025

1.5 years ago

Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking

Sep 22, 2025

1.0 years ago

5mo 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→

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against Llama 4 Maverick and Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Llama 4 Maverick
✓ Preferred
Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Llama 4 Maverick vs Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking.

Which is better, Llama 4 Maverick or Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking?

Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking leads the LLM Stats Score 23.5 to 14.7. Llama 4 Maverick is made by Meta and Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking 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 Llama 4 Maverick compare to Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking in benchmarks?

Llama 4 Maverick scores DocVQA: 94.4%, MGSM: 92.3%, ChartQA: 90.0%, MMLU: 85.5%, MMLU-Pro: 80.5%. 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 Llama 4 Maverick and Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking?

Llama 4 Maverick supports 1.0M 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 Llama 4 Maverick and Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (14.7 vs 23.5), licensing (Llama 4 Community License Agreement vs Apache 2.0). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Llama 4 Maverick and Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking?

Llama 4 Maverick is developed by Meta and Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking is developed by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team.

Related comparisons