Skip to content
ModelCap

Head-to-head comparison

Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 vs Qwen3 32B

Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 (Qwen) and Qwen3 32B (Qwen) compared on the ModelCap Index, API price, context window, provider availability, weight access and every public benchmark board they share. Figures are the same ones shown on the live rankings; nothing here is a hidden score.

Snapshot as of 6 November 2026

As of 6 November 2026, Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 holds the stronger ModelCap Index position (#113 vs #165); Qwen3 32B is 12.5× cheaper per output token ($0.28/1M vs $3.50/1M); and Qwen3 32B offers the longer context window (131K vs 128K tokens).

Which should you choose?

Choose Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 if…

  • you want the stronger overall ModelCap Index position — #113 against #165 (52.8 vs 39.4 points).
  • Arena text is your yardstick — 1400 against 1347.
  • Arena coding is your yardstick — 1442 against 1406.
  • you want the more recently listed model — Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 was listed 25 July 2025, Qwen3 32B 28 April 2025.

Choose Qwen3 32B if…

  • API cost matters — $0.28/1M output tokens against $3.50/1M, about 12.5× cheaper.
  • your workload is prompt-heavy — input tokens cost $0.08/1M against $0.45/1M.
  • you need the longer context window — 131K tokens against 128K.
  • you want provider choice — 3 listed API providers against 1.

Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 vs Qwen3 32B: specs, pricing and context

Specification comparison of Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 and Qwen3 32B
FieldQwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507QwenQwen3 32BQwen
ModelCap Index position#113#165
Index score52.839.4
EvidenceMeasuredMeasured
Input price / 1M tokens$0.45$0.08
Output price / 1M tokens$3.50$0.28
Context window128K tokens131K tokens
Declared route output cap16K16K
API providers listed13
Weight accessOpen weightsOpen weights
Input modalitiesTextText
First listed25 July 202528 April 2025
PublisherQwenQwen

Evidence: 2 public benchmark observations across 2 boards · 2 public benchmark observations across 2 boards. Prices are the lowest listed API offer per million tokens observed on the OpenRouter catalogue.

Benchmark scores: Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 vs Qwen3 32B

Public benchmark boards where Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 or Qwen3 32B has a published result
BoardQwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507Qwen3 32BLeads
Arena textArena (LMArena)14001393–1407Not reported13471337–1356Not reportedQwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
Arena codingArena (LMArena)14421427–145614061382–1430Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
BFCL V4UC Berkeley (Gorilla)—48.7Function callingOnly one result

Scores are the sources' own published figures for each model's best evaluated configuration; ModelCap never re-runs a benchmark.

Want a different pairing? Open the interactive comparison tool to swap either model for any current ranked language model.

Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 vs Qwen3 32B: common questions

Is Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 better than Qwen3 32B?

Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 ranks higher on the ModelCap Index as of 6 November 2026: #113 against #165. That is a capability ranking built from public benchmark evidence with published uncertainty; whether it is "better" for you also depends on price, context and where you can run it. Their published uncertainty intervals do not overlap, but the aggregate Index does not predict performance on every task; compare the relevant benchmark configurations before choosing.

Is Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 cheaper than Qwen3 32B?

Qwen3 32B is cheaper on output tokens: $0.28/1M against $3.50/1M. Input tokens are $0.45/1M for Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 and $0.08/1M for Qwen3 32B. Prices are the lowest listed API offer ModelCap observed, in USD per million tokens. For 1,000 requests with 2,000 input and 500 output tokens each (2M input + 0.5M output), the listed-rate estimate is $2.65 for Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 versus $0.30 for Qwen3 32B. Qwen3 32B costs 88.7% less in this scenario. This excludes caching, batch discounts, prompt-length tiers, tool charges and retries; verify the selected endpoint before budgeting.

Which has the bigger context window, Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 or Qwen3 32B?

Qwen3 32B has the larger context window: 131K tokens against 128K. OpenRouter catalogue or provider-endpoint declaration. Limits can vary by provider and prompt length; a model-wide maximum has not been independently verified.

Which is better for coding, Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 or Qwen3 32B?

Arena coding: Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 1442, Qwen3 32B 1406 — Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 leads.

Are Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 and Qwen3 32B open-weight models?

Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507: Open weights. Qwen3 32B: Open weights. Open weights mean the checkpoint can be downloaded and self-hosted under its licence. A missing weight link does not identify every API or chat product that offers a model.

Where can I run Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 and Qwen3 32B?

ModelCap currently lists 1 API provider for Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 and 3 for Qwen3 32B, from the OpenRouter catalogue snapshot the site serves; each model page lists the providers and their prices.

How current is this Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 vs Qwen3 32B comparison?

Every figure and ModelCap Index position comes from the same published snapshot dated 6 November 2026. Publication and page updates happen separately; use the snapshot date shown on the page.

Explore further