The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

LongCat-2.5 vs QwQ-32B-Preview

LongCat-2.5 leads the LLM Stats Score 50.0 to 8.4. QwQ-32B-Preview is 3.2x cheaper per token.

Meituan · Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

LongCat-2.5 leads the overall LLM Stats Score 50.0 to 8.4, ranking #20 overall.

On price, QwQ-32B-Preview is roughly 3.2x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.

LongCat-2.5 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 LongCat-2.5

  • overall performance matters — it scores 50.0 and ranks #20 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 3.2x cheaper per token
  • you need open weights you can self-host or fine-tune

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

LongCat-2.5
Meituan
QwQ-32B-Preview
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
50.0
#20
8.4
#311
Reasoning
48.3
#21
8.8
#303
Coding
38.6
#27
4.4
#241
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
—
—
Input price
$0.30 / M
$0.15 / M
Output price
$1.20 / M
$0.20 / M
Context window
1,048,576
32,768

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

1 shared
Index
LongCat-2.5
QwQ-32B-Preview
Math
37.2#37
8.8#278
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

23 reported for LongCat-2.5 · 4 for QwQ-32B-Preview

No common benchmarks found

LongCat-2.5 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, LongCat-2.5 ($0.30/1M tokens) is 2.0x more expensive than QwQ-32B-Preview ($0.15/1M tokens).

For output processing, LongCat-2.5 ($1.20/1M tokens) is 6.0x more expensive than QwQ-32B-Preview ($0.20/1M tokens).

In conclusion, LongCat-2.5 is more expensive than QwQ-32B-Preview.*

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

Lowest available price from all providers
Wed Nov 04 2026 • llm-stats.com
Meituan
LongCat-2.5
Input tokens$0.30
Output tokens$1.20
Best providerMeituan
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
QwQ-32B-Preview
Input tokens$0.15
Output tokens$0.20
Best providerDeepinfra
Notice missing or incorrect data?

Model Size

Parameter count comparison

1567.5B diff

LongCat-2.5 has 1567.5B more parameters than QwQ-32B-Preview, making it 4823.1% larger.

Meituan
LongCat-2.5
1.6Tparameters
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
QwQ-32B-Preview
32.5Bparameters
1600.0B
LongCat-2.5
32.5B
QwQ-32B-Preview

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

LongCat-2.5 accepts 1,048,576 input tokens compared to QwQ-32B-Preview's 32,768 tokens. LongCat-2.5 can generate longer responses up to 131,072 tokens, while QwQ-32B-Preview is limited to 32,768 tokens.

Meituan
LongCat-2.5
Input1,048,576 tokens
Output131,072 tokens
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
QwQ-32B-Preview
Input32,768 tokens
Output32,768 tokens
Wed Nov 04 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

LongCat-2.5 supports multimodal inputs, whereas QwQ-32B-Preview does not.

LongCat-2.5 can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.

LongCat-2.5

Text
Images
Audio
Video

QwQ-32B-Preview

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

LongCat-2.5 was released on 2026-11-01, while QwQ-32B-Preview was released on 2024-11-28.

LongCat-2.5 is 23 months newer than QwQ-32B-Preview.

LongCat-2.5

Nov 1, 2026

3 days ago

1.9yr newer
QwQ-32B-Preview

Nov 28, 2024

1.9 years ago

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

QwQ-32B-Preview has a documented knowledge cutoff of 2024-11-28, while LongCat-2.5'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 LongCat-2.5's cutoff date.

LongCat-2.5

—

QwQ-32B-Preview

Nov 2024

Provider Availability

LongCat-2.5 is available from Meituan. QwQ-32B-Preview is available from DeepInfra, Hyperbolic, Fireworks, Together.

LongCat-2.5

meituan logo
Meituan
Input Price:Input: $0.30/1MOutput Price:Output: $1.20/1M

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 LongCat-2.5 and QwQ-32B-Preview side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

LongCat-2.5
✓ Preferred
QwQ-32B-Preview
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about LongCat-2.5 vs QwQ-32B-Preview.

Which is better, LongCat-2.5 or QwQ-32B-Preview?

LongCat-2.5 leads the LLM Stats Score 50.0 to 8.4. LongCat-2.5 is made by Meituan 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 LongCat-2.5 compare to QwQ-32B-Preview in benchmarks?

LongCat-2.5 scores MathVision: 96.5%, BrowseComp: 91.9%, CharXiv-R: 90.2%, Terminal-Bench 2.1: 88.4%, Video-MME: 85.2%. QwQ-32B-Preview scores MATH-500: 90.6%, GPQA: 65.2%, AIME 2024: 50.0%, LiveCodeBench: 50.0%.

Is LongCat-2.5 cheaper than QwQ-32B-Preview?

QwQ-32B-Preview is 2.0x cheaper for input tokens. LongCat-2.5 costs $0.30/M input and $1.20/M output via meituan. QwQ-32B-Preview costs $0.15/M input and $0.20/M output via deepinfra.

What are the context window sizes for LongCat-2.5 and QwQ-32B-Preview?

LongCat-2.5 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 LongCat-2.5 and QwQ-32B-Preview?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (50.0 vs 8.4), context window (1.0M vs 33K), input pricing ($0.30 vs $0.15/M), multimodal support (yes vs no), licensing (Unknown vs Apache 2.0). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes LongCat-2.5 and QwQ-32B-Preview?

LongCat-2.5 is developed by Meituan and QwQ-32B-Preview is developed by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team.

Related comparisons