Skip to content
ModelCap

Head-to-head comparison

Qwen3 32B vs Qwen3.5 397B A17B

Qwen3 32B (Qwen) and Qwen3.5 397B A17B (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, Qwen3.5 397B A17B holds the stronger ModelCap Index position (#48 vs #165); Qwen3 32B is 12.9× cheaper per output token ($0.28/1M vs $3.60/1M); and Qwen3.5 397B A17B offers the longer context window (262K vs 131K tokens).

Which should you choose?

Choose Qwen3 32B if…

  • API cost matters — $0.28/1M output tokens against $3.60/1M, about 12.9× cheaper.
  • your workload is prompt-heavy — input tokens cost $0.08/1M against $0.50/1M.

Choose Qwen3.5 397B A17B if…

  • you want the stronger overall ModelCap Index position — #48 against #165 (68.6 vs 39.4 points).
  • you need the longer context window — 262K tokens against 131K.
  • you want provider choice — 10 listed API providers against 3.
  • Arena text is your yardstick — 1441 against 1347.
  • Arena coding is your yardstick — 1491 against 1406.
  • you want the more recently listed model — Qwen3.5 397B A17B was listed 16 February 2026, Qwen3 32B 28 April 2025.

Qwen3 32B vs Qwen3.5 397B A17B: specs, pricing and context

Specification comparison of Qwen3 32B and Qwen3.5 397B A17B
FieldQwen3 32BQwenQwen3.5 397B A17BQwen
ModelCap Index position#165#48
Index score39.468.6
EvidenceMeasuredMeasured
Input price / 1M tokens$0.08$0.50
Output price / 1M tokens$0.28$3.60
Context window131K tokens262K tokens
Declared route output cap16K236K
API providers listed310
Weight accessOpen weightsOpen weights
Input modalitiesTextText, Image, Video
First listed28 April 202516 February 2026
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 32B vs Qwen3.5 397B A17B

Public benchmark boards where Qwen3 32B or Qwen3.5 397B A17B has a published result
BoardQwen3 32BQwen3.5 397B A17BLeads
Arena textArena (LMArena)13471337–1356Not reported14411438–1444Not reportedQwen3.5 397B A17B
Arena codingArena (LMArena)14061382–143014911486–1496Qwen3.5 397B A17B
BFCL V4UC Berkeley (Gorilla)48.7Function calling—Only 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 32B vs Qwen3.5 397B A17B: common questions

Is Qwen3 32B better than Qwen3.5 397B A17B?

Qwen3.5 397B A17B ranks higher on the ModelCap Index as of 6 November 2026: #48 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 32B cheaper than Qwen3.5 397B A17B?

Qwen3 32B is cheaper on output tokens: $0.28/1M against $3.60/1M. Input tokens are $0.08/1M for Qwen3 32B and $0.50/1M for Qwen3.5 397B A17B. 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 $0.30 for Qwen3 32B versus $2.80 for Qwen3.5 397B A17B. Qwen3 32B costs 89.3% 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 32B or Qwen3.5 397B A17B?

Qwen3.5 397B A17B has the larger context window: 262K tokens against 131K. 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 32B or Qwen3.5 397B A17B?

Arena coding: Qwen3 32B 1406, Qwen3.5 397B A17B 1491 — Qwen3.5 397B A17B leads.

Are Qwen3 32B and Qwen3.5 397B A17B open-weight models?

Qwen3 32B: Open weights. Qwen3.5 397B A17B: 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 32B and Qwen3.5 397B A17B?

ModelCap currently lists 3 API providers for Qwen3 32B and 10 for Qwen3.5 397B A17B, from the OpenRouter catalogue snapshot the site serves; each model page lists the providers and their prices.

How current is this Qwen3 32B vs Qwen3.5 397B A17B 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