GPT OSS 20B vs QwQ 32B
GPT OSS 20B comes out ahead, 64 to 53 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.
- Our pick
OpenAIGPT OSS 20B
64/100- ECI137.8
- Price$0.07 / $0.295
- Context131K
Alibaba (Qwen)QwQ 32B
53/100- ECI137.6
- Price$0.66 / $1.00
- Context131K
Add a model
Make it a three-way comparison.
GPT OSS 20B is our pick
GPT OSS 20B is the better all-round choice, scoring 64/100 against QwQ 32B (53). It leads on price and inputs & features. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.
- CapabilityGPT OSS 20BCapabilities Index (ECI): GPT OSS 20B 137.8 · QwQ 32B 137.6
- Lowest priceGPT OSS 20BGPT OSS 20B $0.126 · QwQ 32B $0.745 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextAbout the sameGPT OSS 20B 131,072 · QwQ 32B 131,072 tokens
- Widest inputsSame inputsGPT OSS 20B: Text · QwQ 32B: Text
- Self-hostingAll open weightsEvery model here can be downloaded and run on your own hardware
| Measure | Weight | GPT OSS 20B | QwQ 32B |
|---|---|---|---|
| CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI) | 50% | 63 | 62 |
| Price | 25% | 92 | 56 |
| Inputs & features | 15% | 45 | 35 |
| Context window | 10% | 24 | 24 |
| Overall | 100% | 64/100 | 53/100 |
Every spec in one table
Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.
| Specification | GPT OSS 20BOpenAI | QwQ 32BAlibaba (Qwen) |
|---|---|---|
| Capability | ||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | 137.8 (best) | 137.6 |
| ECI rank | #108 of 148 (best) | #109 of 148 |
| GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions | 60.8% | 65.3% (best) |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics | 65.3% (best) | 59.2% |
| Price per million tokens | ||
| Input | $0.07 (best) | $0.66 |
| Output | $0.295 (best) | $1.00 |
| Cached input | — | — |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.126 (best) | $0.745 |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Median of 18 providers | Median of 1 providers |
| Limits | ||
| Context window | 131,072 tokens | 131,072 tokens |
| Max output | 32,768 tokens (best) | 8,192 tokens |
| Inputs and features | ||
| Text | Yes | Yes |
| Images | No | No |
| PDFs | No | No |
| Audio | No | No |
| Video | No | No |
| Reasoning | Yes | Yes |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | Yes | No |
| Availability | ||
| Weights | Open | Open |
| API model ID | — | — |
| API providers | 19 (best) | 1 |
| Released | Aug 5, 2025 | Mar 5, 2025 |
| Knowledge cutoff | — | 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 OSS 20B$1.29
- QwQ 32B$8.60
Which should you choose?
Which is better: GPT OSS 20B or QwQ 32B?
GPT OSS 20B is the better all-round choice, scoring 64/100 against QwQ 32B (53). It leads on price and inputs & features. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.
Which is cheaper, GPT OSS 20B or QwQ 32B?
GPT OSS 20B is cheaper at $0.07 input / $0.295 output per million tokens (median across 18 API providers). QwQ 32B costs $0.66 input / $1.00 output per million tokens (median across 1 API provider). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.126 per million tokens for GPT OSS 20B versus $0.745 for QwQ 32B (5.9× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
GPT OSS 20B scores higher on the Capabilities Index (ECI): GPT OSS 20B 137.8 (#108 of 148) and QwQ 32B 137.6 (#109 of 148). The confidence ranges of the top two overlap (133.0–139.6 vs 133.1–141.7), so treat the gap as small. On individual benchmarks: GPQA Diamond — QwQ 32B 65.3%, GPT OSS 20B 60.8%; OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025 — GPT OSS 20B 65.3%, QwQ 32B 59.2%.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for GPT OSS 20B and QwQ 32B yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. On overall capability, GPT OSS 20B leads, which tends to carry over to coding, but test on your own codebase. Both support tool calling for agent workflows.
Which has the bigger context window?
GPT OSS 20B and QwQ 32B share the same 131,072-token context window. Maximum output per response: GPT OSS 20B up to 32,768, QwQ 32B up to 8,192 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
GPT OSS 20B accepts text; QwQ 32B accepts text. They handle the same number of input types.
Are any of these open source?
Yes, both publish their weights, so you can self-host them.
Which is newer?
GPT OSS 20B is the newest, released Aug 5, 2025. QwQ 32B came out Mar 5, 2025. Knowledge cutoff: 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.
Related comparisons
- Add Qwen3.5 9BThree-way comparison
- GPT OSS 20B vs Qwen3.5 9BAlibaba (Qwen) · ECI 139.5
- GPT OSS 20B vs Gemini 2.5 Flash-LiteGoogle · ECI 133.9
- GPT OSS 20B vs Mistral Small 3.2Mistral AI · ECI 131.7
- GPT OSS 20B vs DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-32BDeepSeek · ECI 137.4
- QwQ 32B vs GPT-4.1 miniOpenAI · ECI 135.0
- QwQ 32B vs DeepSeek-R1DeepSeek · ECI 139.0
