Compare / Qwen3-32B vs GPT-5 nano
Qwen3-32B vs GPT-5 nano
Which is cheaper, which is more capable, and which does better at each kind of work, from 23 results on 4 sources that measured both models.
Of the 23 results both models have, the better value on each. Results whose reported ranges overlap are too close to call.
Results as of 9 October 2026 (catalogue release 2026-10-09-dd620e778ac5). See also Alibaba vs OpenAI, every model from both labs.
Qwen3-32B or GPT-5 nano? The short answer
Pick GPT-5 nano: it scores higher (Intelligence Index 13.0 against 8.6) and costs less.
- GPT-5 nano is cheaper: $0.14 against $0.21 per million tokens, 33% less.
- GPT-5 nano scores higher on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index: 13.0 against 8.6.
- GPT-5 nano is newer: released 7 Aug 2025, against 28 Apr 2025 for Qwen3-32B.
- On third-party benchmarks, on the results both models have: Qwen3-32B does better for sticking to the facts; GPT-5 nano for agents and tool use and reasoning and knowledge.
Head to head
Every fact side by side
| Qwen3-32B | GPT-5 nano | |
|---|---|---|
| Price per million tokens | $0.14 in · $0.40 out | $0.050 in · $0.40 out |
| Blended (3 in : 1 out) | $0.21 | $0.14 |
| Cheapest host, blended | $0.13 (DeepInfra, FP8) | $0.14 (Azure) |
| Intelligence Index | 8.6 | 13.0 |
| Spring Prompt overall | – | – |
| Output speed, tokens a second | – | – |
| Context window | 131,072 tokens | 400,000 tokens |
| Released | 28 Apr 2025 | 7 Aug 2025 (newer) |
| Weights | Open | Closed |
| Developer based in | China | the US |
Prices are the developer's list price where we have read it, otherwise the typical host on OpenRouter; see every model's price. Intelligence and speed from Artificial Analysis.
Which is better for what
Each model's rank among the models on sale today, for each kind of work, from our own benchmarks and licensed sources. Further right is better; the better rank is in green.
Every shared result
Each model's best result on every measure both have, grouped by benchmark, with the setting that produced it. Under each measure, every model that benchmark has measured is a grey tick, best to the right, so you can see where the two sit in the field. The headline measures of each benchmark come first; the rest are under "Show all". Green marks the better value; where a source reports ranges that overlap, neither is marked.
| Measure | Qwen3-32B | GPT-5 nano |
|---|---|---|
| Arena (formerly LMArena) reported by Arena (formerly LMArena) · 3 results | ||
| Overall · TextArena rating, higher is better 195 · 207 of 387 measured | 1,347 | 1,338high reasoning |
| Business, management and finance · TextArena rating, higher is better 203 · 204 of 380 measured | 1,340 | 1,339high reasoning |
| Creative writing · TextArena rating, higher is better 205 · 268 of 385 measured | 1,304 | 1,247high reasoning |
| Artificial Analysis reported by Artificial Analysis · 3 results | ||
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence Indexindex score, higher is better 188 · 144 of 243 measured | 8.6thinking reasoning | 13.0high reasoning |
| GPQA Diamond% of questions, higher is better 167 · 162 of 231 measured | 66.8%thinking reasoning | 67.6%high reasoning |
| Humanity's Last Exam% of questions, higher is better 168 · 160 of 242 measured | 7.4%thinking reasoning | 9.5%high reasoning |
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL) V4 reported by Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL) V4 · 3 results | ||
| Overall accuracy · BFCL% correct, higher is better 24 · 21 of 81 measured | 48.7%bfcl fc | 51.5%bfcl fc |
| Irrelevance detection · BFCL% correct, higher is better 37 · 14 of 81 measured | 82.4%bfcl prompt | 89.1%bfcl fc |
| Memory · BFCL% correct, higher is better 21 · 24 of 81 measured | 26.7%bfcl fc | 24.7%bfcl fc |
| Vectara Hallucination Leaderboard reported by Vectara Hallucination Leaderboard · 2 results | ||
| Hallucination rate · Vectara% of summaries, lower is better 24 · 62 of 104 measured | 5.9% | 10.5% |
| Answer rate · Vectara% of documents, higher is better 17 · 1 of 104 measured | 99.9% | 100.0% |
Show all 23 results (12 more)
| Measure | Qwen3-32B | GPT-5 nano |
|---|---|---|
| Arena (formerly LMArena) reported by Arena (formerly LMArena) · 3 results | ||
| Expert prompts · TextArena rating, higher is better 159 · 191 of 338 measured | 1,398 | 1,354high reasoning |
| Instruction following · TextArena rating, higher is better 198 · 200 of 387 measured | 1,331 | 1,327high reasoning |
| Writing, literature and language · TextArena rating, higher is better 217 · 247 of 386 measured | 1,308 | 1,289high reasoning |
| Artificial Analysis reported by Artificial Analysis · 4 results | ||
| IFBench% of instructions, higher is better 155 · 64 of 195 measured | 36.3%thinking reasoning | 67.6%high reasoning |
| Long-context reasoning (AA-LCR)% of questions, higher is better 222 · 162 of 233 measured | 0.0%no reasoning | 45.0%high reasoning |
| Terminal-Bench Hard% of tasks, higher is better 169 · 100 of 190 measured | 3.0%thinking reasoning | 17.4%medium reasoning |
| τ²-bench telecom% of tasks, higher is better 135 · 119 of 193 measured | 29.8%thinking reasoning | 36.6%high reasoning |
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL) V4 reported by Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL) V4 · 5 results | ||
| Multi-turn tasks · BFCL% correct, higher is better 17 · 32 of 81 measured | 47.9%bfcl fc | 34.5%bfcl fc |
| Relevance detection · BFCL% correct, higher is better 8 · 8 of 81 measured | 93.8%bfcl fc | 93.8%bfcl prompt |
| Single-turn calls (curated) · BFCL% correct, higher is better 3 · 61 of 81 measured | 90.3%bfcl prompt | 80.8%bfcl prompt |
| Single-turn calls (user-contributed) · BFCL% correct, higher is better 3 · 45 of 81 measured | 82.0%bfcl fc | 70.7%bfcl prompt |
| Web search · BFCL% correct, higher is better 28 · 13 of 81 measured | 26.0%bfcl prompt | 72.5%bfcl fc |
Compare them with other models
Quick answers
Is Qwen3-32B better than GPT-5 nano?
Pick GPT-5 nano: it scores higher (Intelligence Index 13.0 against 8.6) and costs less.
Which is cheaper, Qwen3-32B or GPT-5 nano?
GPT-5 nano is cheaper: $0.14 against $0.21 per million tokens, 33% less.
Which is better for agents and tool use, Qwen3-32B or GPT-5 nano?
GPT-5 nano ranks 53 of 164 models on sale for multi-step tasks with tools: support desks, coding agents, function calls, against 113 for Qwen3-32B.
Which is better for reasoning and knowledge, Qwen3-32B or GPT-5 nano?
GPT-5 nano ranks 134 of 198 models on sale for hard questions across science, maths and general knowledge, against 148 for Qwen3-32B.
Which is better for writing, Qwen3-32B or GPT-5 nano?
Qwen3-32B ranks 139 of 188 models on sale for what people prefer in blind comparisons, and judged writing quality, against 151 for GPT-5 nano.
Which is better for sticking to the facts, Qwen3-32B or GPT-5 nano?
Qwen3-32B ranks 22 of 152 models on sale for summarising without inventing things, and factual answers, against 125 for GPT-5 nano.
Which has the bigger context window, Qwen3-32B or GPT-5 nano?
GPT-5 nano: 400,000 tokens, against 131,072 for Qwen3-32B.
Run Qwen3-32B and GPT-5 nano on your own prompt
Benchmarks aren't your data. Try both side by side in the playground, with the cost of every answer.