Head-to-head comparison across 1benchmark categories. Overall scores shown here use BenchLM's provisional ranking lane.
Exaone 4.0 32B
66
Qwen3.5-27B
61
Verified leaderboard positions: Exaone 4.0 32B unranked · Qwen3.5-27B #23
Pick Exaone 4.0 32B if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Qwen3.5-27B only becomes the better choice if you need the larger 262K context window.
Knowledge
+1.2 difference
Exaone 4.0 32B
Qwen3.5-27B
N/A
$0 / $0
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
128K
262K
Pick Exaone 4.0 32B if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Qwen3.5-27B only becomes the better choice if you need the larger 262K context window.
Exaone 4.0 32B is clearly ahead on the provisional aggregate, 66 to 61. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
Exaone 4.0 32B's sharpest advantage is in knowledge, where it averages 81.8 against 80.6. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is MMLU-Pro, 81.8% to 86.1%.
Qwen3.5-27B gives you the larger context window at 262K, compared with 128K for Exaone 4.0 32B.
Exaone 4.0 32B is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 66 to 61. The biggest single separator in this matchup is MMLU-Pro, where the scores are 81.8% and 86.1%.
Exaone 4.0 32B has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 81.8 versus 80.6. Inside this category, Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
For engineers, researchers, and the plain curious — a weekly brief on new models, ranking shifts, and pricing changes.
Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.