Model comparison
Claude 3.7 Sonnet vs Qwen2.5 32B Instruct
Claude 3.7 Sonnet is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.4 to 29.7 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 4 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 4 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude 3.7 Sonnet scores higher in 4 categories and Qwen2.5 32B Instruct in 0 categories; 3 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Claude 3.7 Sonnet leads 35.7 to 15.3.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 57.8% for Claude 3.7 Sonnet and 7.4% for Qwen2.5 32B Instruct.
- Qwen2.5 32B Instruct has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Claude 3.7 Sonnet | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 39.4 | 29.7 |
| Released | 2025-02-24 | 2024-09 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | — | 131K |
| Max output | — | 8K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.70 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $2.80 |
| Results tracked | 58 | 7 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Claude 3.7 Sonnet leads
Claude 3.7 Sonnet: 41.1 (#120), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: 38.1 (#165)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.7 Sonnet | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench Verified | 61% | — |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 52.8% | — |
| Aider Polyglot | 64.9% | — |
| GSO | 3.8% | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 45% |
| LiveBench Coding | 74.5% | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1361 | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 52.3% |
| CadEval | 54% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Claude 3.7 Sonnet: 33.9 (#46), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | Claude 3.7 Sonnet | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| TheAgentCompany | 30.9% | — |
| Cybench | 20% | — |
| DeepResearch Bench | 43.6% | — |
| OSWorld | 35.8% | — |
| METR Time Horizons | 60% | — |
Reasoning Too close to call
Claude 3.7 Sonnet: 18.7 (#252), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: 18.5 (#262)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.7 Sonnet | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 141.16 | 128.52 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 0.9% | — |
| SimpleBench | 46.4% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 28.6% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 0% |
| EnigmaEval | 4.2% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 87.8% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1333 | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 74% | — |
| ForecastBench | 61.8 | — |
| LiveBench | 76.1% | — |
Math Claude 3.7 Sonnet leads
Claude 3.7 Sonnet: 35.7 (#137), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: 15.3 (#289)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.7 Sonnet | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 57.8% | 7.4% |
| MATH Level 5 | 91.2% | 56.1% |
| Omni-MATH | 33% | — |
| LiveBench Math | 79% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1336 | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 4.1% | — |
Knowledge Claude 3.7 Sonnet leads
Claude 3.7 Sonnet: 39.7 (#117), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: 24.9 (#259)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.7 Sonnet | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 79.7% | 46.1% |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 8% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | 78.4% | — |
| Confabulations | 14.7% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 60.8% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1321 | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Claude 3.7 Sonnet: 33.1 (#90), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | Claude 3.7 Sonnet | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1169 | — |
| GeoBench | 68% | — |
| VPCT | 39% | — |
| SpatialViz-Bench | 33.9% | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
Claude 3.7 Sonnet: 44.3 (#174), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | Claude 3.7 Sonnet | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1296 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1299 | — |
| LMArena French | 1302 | — |
| LMArena German | 1301 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1268 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1249 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1311 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1299 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Claude 3.7 Sonnet: 73.1 (#120), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | Claude 3.7 Sonnet | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 81.3% | — |
| IFEval | 83.4% | — |
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1352 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
Claude 3.7 Sonnet: 50.2 (#10), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | Claude 3.7 Sonnet | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | 83.3% | — |
| LMArena Longer Query | 1373 | — |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Claude 3.7 Sonnet: 54.6 (#145), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | Claude 3.7 Sonnet | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1314 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1332 | — |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 81.1% | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1412 | — |
| WildBench | 81.4% | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1339 | — |
| LiveBench Language | 59.9% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Claude 3.7 Sonnet better than Qwen2.5 32B Instruct?
Claude 3.7 Sonnet is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.4 to 29.7 on the Noometry Index.
Is Claude 3.7 Sonnet or Qwen2.5 32B Instruct better for coding?
Claude 3.7 Sonnet scores higher on coding benchmarks: 41.1 versus 38.1 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Claude 3.7 Sonnet and Qwen2.5 32B Instruct share?
4 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude 3.7 Sonnet has 58 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5 32B Instruct has 7.