Alibaba Qwen QwQ 32B vs OpenAI GPT-4o

Detailed comparison for LLMs

AlibabaOpenAI

On Guardion's LLM vulnerability Benchmark, OpenAI GPT-4o is the more secure of the two: Qwen QwQ 32B scores 40.0% and GPT-4o scores 22.8% on attack success rate (ASR) (lower is better).

Head-to-Head Overview

GPT-4o is the overall winner in this comparison!

Attack Success Rate (lower is safer)

ASR for Alibaba Qwen QwQ 32B vs OpenAI GPT-4o. Green marks the safer model on each metric.

Overall (ASR)

Qwen QwQ 32B
40.0%
GPT-4o
22.8%

TAP Attack Method (ASR)

Qwen QwQ 32B
73.9%
GPT-4o
39.6%

Crescendo Attack Method (ASR)

Qwen QwQ 32B
40.9%
GPT-4o
25.6%

Zero-Shot (ASR)

Qwen QwQ 32B
5.3%
GPT-4o
3.4%

Key Highlights

  • OpenAI GPT-4o has a lower Overall (ASR).
  • OpenAI GPT-4o has a lower TAP Attack Method (ASR).
  • OpenAI GPT-4o has a lower Crescendo Attack Method (ASR).
  • OpenAI GPT-4o has a lower Zero-Shot (ASR).

Security Profile

Outward is better on every axis.

OverallTAPCrescendoZero-Shot
Qwen QwQ 32B
GPT-4o
Full security profile
Alibaba Qwen QwQ 32B
Full security profile
OpenAI GPT-4o

Frequently asked questions

Is Alibaba Qwen QwQ 32B or OpenAI GPT-4o more secure?

On Guardion's LLM vulnerability Benchmark, OpenAI GPT-4o is the more secure of the two: Qwen QwQ 32B scores 40.0% and GPT-4o scores 22.8% on attack success rate (ASR) (lower is better).

What is the attack success rate (ASR) of Qwen QwQ 32B vs GPT-4o?

Qwen QwQ 32B has a 40.0% ASR and GPT-4o has a 22.8% ASR — the share of adversarial prompts that succeed across zero-shot, TAP, and Crescendo attacks. Lower is safer.

How were Qwen QwQ 32B and GPT-4o tested?

Both were red-teamed with the HarmBench framework across zero-shot, TAP (Tree of Attacks with Pruning), and Crescendo multi-turn attacks, scored by Attack Success Rate.

Related Comparisons