Claude 3.7 Thinking Sonnet vs QwQ 32B
Compare Claude 3.7 Thinking Sonnet by Anthropic against QwQ 32B by Qwen, in 7 community votes, claude 3.7 thinking sonnet wins 80% of head-to-head duels, context windows of 200K vs 40K, tested across 15 shared challenges.
Web Design: Claude 3.7 Thinking Sonnet wins 75% of votes
Our Verdict
Claude 3.7 Thinking SonnetWinner
QwQ 32BRunner-up
Pick Claude 3.7 Thinking Sonnet. In 7 blind votes, Claude 3.7 Thinking Sonnet wins 80% of the time. That's not luck.
Claude 3.7 Thinking Sonnet particularly excels in Web Design. QwQ 32B is 20x cheaper per token — worth considering if cost matters.
Clear winner
API pricing
Cost per 1M tokens
Claude 3.7 Thinking Sonnet
Input
$6.00
Output
$30.00
QwQ 32B
Input
$0.50
12× cheaper
Output
$1.50
20× cheaper
QwQ 32B is cheaper on both — 12× input, 20× output
Writing DNA
Style Comparison
Similarity
37%
Claude 3.7 Thinking Sonnet uses 180.6x more headings
Claude 3.7 Thinking Sonnet
QwQ 32B
61%Vocabulary64%
49wSentence Length12w
0.64Hedging0.36
2.2Bold13.6
4.5Lists8.4
0.00Emoji0.00
1.81Headings0.00
0.21Transitions0.39
Based on 21 + 4 text responses
Research
What we learned reading every model
FAQ
