Qwen3 32B vs Seed Oss 36B Instruct
Wins 1 of 6 areas
Facts
Wins 5 of 6 areas
Coding · Agents · Reasoning · Long documents · Following instructions
Seed Oss 36B Instruct is the stronger all-rounder.Qwen3 32B is better at facts.
Scores updated · 17 tests both models report · How we compare
Where each one wins
Tests won in each of the six areas where both have results. Each piece is one test, so a longer bar means more evidence; grey means the two scored within a point of each other.
- ReasoningHard problems that need careful thinking02Seed Oss 36B Instruct2 of 3 tests · 1 tie
- CodingWriting and fixing software01Seed Oss 36B Instruct1 of 2 tests · 1 tie
- AgentsCarrying out multi-step tasks on its own01Seed Oss 36B Instruct1 of 1 test
- Long documentsFinding answers in very long texts01Seed Oss 36B Instruct1 of 1 test
- Following instructionsDoing exactly what it is asked01Seed Oss 36B Instruct1 of 1 test
- FactsGetting facts right instead of making them up10Qwen3 32B1 of 2 tests · 1 tie
Agents, long documents and following instructions rest on a single test each.
What it costs
Prices per million tokens, roughly 750,000 words. The bars show the cost of a million tokens read plus a million written.
Seed Oss 36B Instruct costs 3% less for the same work.
The biggest differences
The tests each model wins by the widest margin, up to three each. Scores are out of 100.
Where Seed Oss 36B Instruct pulls ahead
- Graduate-level biology, physics and chemistry questionsGPQA Diamond+5.8points ahead
- Follows unfamiliar, precisely checkable instructionsIFBench+5.6points ahead
- Hard command-line tasks in a real terminalTerminal-Bench Hard+3.8points ahead
Where Qwen3 32B pulls ahead
- Avoids making up answers it doesn't knowAA-Omniscience · Non-hallucination+4.3points ahead
Every test, side by side
All 17 tests both models report. The winning score is in its model's colour; marks a score checked independently.
CodingSeed Oss 36B Instruct
- Terminal-Bench HardSeed Oss 36B Instruct by 3.836.8+3.8
- SciCodetie3636.5tie
ReasoningSeed Oss 36B Instruct
- GPQA DiamondSeed Oss 36B Instruct by 5.866.872.6+5.8
- Humanity's Last ExamSeed Oss 36B Instruct by 2.57.49.9+2.5
- CritPttie0.30tie
FactsQwen3 32B
- AA-Omniscience · Non-hallucinationQwen3 32B by 4.317.913.6+4.3
- AA-Omniscience · Accuracytie17.418.2tie
Long documentsSeed Oss 36B Instruct
- AA-LCRSeed Oss 36B Instruct by 61.3061.3+61.3
Following instructionsSeed Oss 36B Instruct
- IFBenchSeed Oss 36B Instruct by 5.636.341.9+5.6
Other results7 tests, not counted
Tests outside the eight areas. They are not counted above: several are summary scores built from other tests, or the same test under another name.
- τ²-Bench Telecom (AA run)Seed Oss 36B Instruct by 19.629.849.4+19.6
- AIME 2025Seed Oss 36B Instruct by 11.872.984.7+11.8
- AIME 2024Seed Oss 36B Instruct by 10.381.491.7+10.3
- AA IntelligenceSeed Oss 36B Instruct by 3.58.612.1+3.5
- AA-OmniscienceQwen3 32B by 2.1-50.4-52.5+2.1
- Artificial Analysis Coding IndexSeed Oss 36B Instruct by 1.415.316.7+1.4
- MMLU-Protie81.882.7tie
Questions people ask
Which is better, Qwen3 32B or Seed Oss 36B Instruct?
Seed Oss 36B Instruct wins five of the six areas where both have results: coding, agents, reasoning, long documents and following instructions. Qwen3 32B wins facts.
Which is better for coding?
Seed Oss 36B Instruct. It wins 1 of the 2 coding tests both models report; Qwen3 32B wins none, and 1 is a tie.
Which is cheaper?
Qwen3 32B costs $0.16 per million input tokens and $0.64 per million output tokens; Seed Oss 36B Instruct costs $0.21 and $0.57. That makes Seed Oss 36B Instruct about 3% cheaper for the same work.
How do you compare the two?
We use the 17 benchmark tests both models have published scores on. The verdict counts the 10 tests in the eight capability areas, and a gap under one point (ten on rating-style scales) counts as a tie. The other 7 are listed but not counted, because several are summary scores or repeat a test. Each score is the one shown on the model's own page.