GPT-4.1 mini vs Qwen3 32B vs QwQ 32B
GPT-4.1 mini comes out ahead, 60 to 53 and 51 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.
- Our pick
OpenAI
GPT-4.1 mini
60/100- ECI135.0
- Price$0.40 / $1.60
- Context1.05M
Alibaba (Qwen)
Qwen3 32B
51/100- ECI138.5
- Price$0.70 / $2.80
- Context131K
Alibaba (Qwen)
QwQ 32B
53/100- ECI137.6
- Price$0.66 / $1.00
- Context131K
GPT-4.1 mini is our pick
GPT-4.1 mini is the better all-round choice, scoring 60/100 against QwQ 32B (53) and Qwen3 32B (51). It leads on inputs & features and context window. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.
- CapabilityQwen3 32BCapabilities Index (ECI): Qwen3 32B 138.5 · QwQ 32B 137.6 · GPT-4.1 mini 135.0
- Lowest priceGPT-4.1 miniGPT-4.1 mini $0.70 · QwQ 32B $0.745 · Qwen3 32B $1.23 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextGPT-4.1 miniGPT-4.1 mini 1,047,576 · Qwen3 32B 131,072 · QwQ 32B 131,072 tokens
- Widest inputsGPT-4.1 miniGPT-4.1 mini: Text, Images, PDFs · Qwen3 32B: Text · QwQ 32B: Text
- Self-hostingQwen3 32B and QwQ 32BPublishes downloadable weights
| Measure | Weight | GPT-4.1 mini | Qwen3 32B | QwQ 32B |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI) | 50% | 59 | 64 | 62 |
| Price | 25% | 57 | 46 | 56 |
| Inputs & features | 15% | 70 | 35 | 35 |
| Context window | 10% | 61 | 24 | 24 |
| Overall | 100% | 60/100 | 51/100 | 53/100 |
Every spec in one table
Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.
| Specification | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | |||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | 135.0 | 138.5 (best) | 137.6 |
| ECI rank | #115 of 148 | #106 of 148 (best) | #109 of 148 |
| GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions | 65.9% (best) | 65.7% | 65.3% |
| FrontierMath Tiers 1–3Research-level mathematics | 6.7% | — | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics | 44.7% | 66.9% (best) | 59.2% |
| SimpleQA VerifiedShort factual questions | 12.7% | — | — |
| Price per million tokens | |||
| Input | $0.40 (best) | $0.70 | $0.66 |
| Output | $1.60 | $2.80 | $1.00 (best) |
| Cached input | $0.10 | — | — |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.70 (best) | $1.23 | $0.745 |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Official OpenAI API | Official Alibaba API | Median of 1 providers |
| Limits | |||
| Context window | 1,047,576 tokens (best) | 131,072 tokens | 131,072 tokens |
| Max output | 32,768 tokens (best) | 16,384 tokens | 8,192 tokens |
| Inputs and features | |||
| Text | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Images | Yes | No | No |
| PDFs | Yes | No | No |
| Audio | No | No | No |
| Video | No | No | No |
| Reasoning | No | Yes | Yes |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | Yes | No | No |
| Availability | |||
| Weights | Proprietary | Open | Open |
| API model ID | gpt-4.1-mini | qwen3-32b | — |
| API providers | 24 (best) | 14 | 1 |
| Released | Apr 14, 2025 | Apr 29, 2025 | Mar 5, 2025 |
| Knowledge cutoff | Apr 2024 | Apr 2025 | Apr 2024 |
What would a month cost?
Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.
GPT-4.1 mini$7.20
Qwen3 32B$12.60
QwQ 32B$8.60
Which should you choose?
Which is better: GPT-4.1 mini, Qwen3 32B or QwQ 32B?
GPT-4.1 mini is the better all-round choice, scoring 60/100 against QwQ 32B (53) and Qwen3 32B (51). It leads on inputs & features and context window. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.
Which is cheaper, GPT-4.1 mini, Qwen3 32B or QwQ 32B?
GPT-4.1 mini is cheaper at $0.40 input / $1.60 output per million tokens (official OpenAI API price). QwQ 32B costs $0.66 input / $1.00 output per million tokens (median across 1 API provider); Qwen3 32B costs $0.70 input / $2.80 output per million tokens (official Alibaba API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.70 per million tokens for GPT-4.1 mini versus $0.745 for QwQ 32B (1.1× as much) and $1.23 for Qwen3 32B (1.8× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
Qwen3 32B scores higher on the Capabilities Index (ECI): Qwen3 32B 138.5 (#106 of 148), QwQ 32B 137.6 (#109 of 148) and GPT-4.1 mini 135.0 (#115 of 148). The confidence ranges of the top two overlap (135.1–140.4 vs 133.1–141.7), so treat the gap as small. On individual benchmarks: GPQA Diamond — GPT-4.1 mini 65.9%, Qwen3 32B 65.7%, QwQ 32B 65.3%; OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025 — Qwen3 32B 66.9%, QwQ 32B 59.2%, GPT-4.1 mini 44.7%.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for GPT-4.1 mini, Qwen3 32B and QwQ 32B yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. On overall capability, Qwen3 32B leads, which tends to carry over to coding, but test on your own codebase. All three support tool calling for agent workflows.
Which has the bigger context window?
GPT-4.1 mini has the largest context window at 1,047,576 tokens, against 131,072 for Qwen3 32B and 131,072 for QwQ 32B. Maximum output per response: GPT-4.1 mini up to 32,768, Qwen3 32B up to 16,384, QwQ 32B up to 8,192 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
GPT-4.1 mini accepts text, images and PDFs; Qwen3 32B accepts text; QwQ 32B accepts text. GPT-4.1 mini handles the widest range of inputs.
Are any of these open source?
Qwen3 32B and QwQ 32B publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; GPT-4.1 mini is proprietary.
Which is newer?
Qwen3 32B is the newest, released Apr 29, 2025. GPT-4.1 mini came out Apr 14, 2025; QwQ 32B came out Mar 5, 2025. Knowledge cutoff: GPT-4.1 mini Apr 2024, Qwen3 32B Apr 2025, QwQ 32B Apr 2024.
How do you decide the winner?
Each model gets a 0–100 score on capability (50%, independent benchmark results); price (25%, blended price per million tokens (3 input : 1 output), log scale); inputs & features (15%, image, PDF, audio and video input, tool calling, structured output and reasoning); context window (10%, maximum tokens per request, log scale). Dimensions missing for any model are dropped and the remaining weights rescaled, so every model is judged on the same evidence. Specs and prices come from public model listings and the labs’ own API pages; capability scores come from independent benchmark runs. Data updated Oct 4, 2026.