Model comparison
Claude Haiku 5.5 vs Qwen2.5 32B Instruct
Claude Haiku 5.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 49.5 to 30.1 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 2 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 2 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Haiku 5.5 scores higher in 4 categories and Qwen2.5 32B Instruct in 0 categories; 4 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Claude Haiku 5.5 leads 73.6 to 16.2.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 98.9% for Claude Haiku 5.5 and 7.4% for Qwen2.5 32B Instruct.
- Claude Haiku 5.5 is cheaper at $0.10 / $0.50 per million input/output tokens, against $0.70 / $2.80 for Qwen2.5 32B Instruct.
- Claude Haiku 5.5 accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 131K.
- Qwen2.5 32B Instruct has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Claude Haiku 5.5 | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 49.5 | 30.1 |
| Released | 2026-10-07 | 2024-09 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 1M | 131K |
| Max output | 128K | 8K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.10 | $0.70 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.50 | $2.80 |
| Results tracked | 9 | 7 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Claude Haiku 5.5 leads
Claude Haiku 5.5: 49.2 (#50), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: 38.7 (#169)
| Benchmark | Claude Haiku 5.5 | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1587 | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 45% |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 52.3% |
Reasoning Claude Haiku 5.5 leads
Claude Haiku 5.5: 35.2 (#69), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: 19.2 (#266)
| Benchmark | Claude Haiku 5.5 | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| NYT Connections (extended) | 65.7% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 0% |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 30% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 128.52 |
Math Claude Haiku 5.5 leads
Claude Haiku 5.5: 73.6 (#18), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: 16.2 (#296)
| Benchmark | Claude Haiku 5.5 | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 98.9% | 7.4% |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 75.1% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 46.3% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 56.1% |
Knowledge Claude Haiku 5.5 leads
Claude Haiku 5.5: 50.8 (#70), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: 24.9 (#266)
| Benchmark | Claude Haiku 5.5 | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 89.6% | 46.1% |
| SimpleQA Verified | 23.8% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Claude Haiku 5.5: 43.7 (#21), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | Claude Haiku 5.5 | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Furniture Assembly | 47.5% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Claude Haiku 5.5 better than Qwen2.5 32B Instruct?
Claude Haiku 5.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 49.5 to 30.1 on the Noometry Index.
Which is cheaper, Claude Haiku 5.5 or Qwen2.5 32B Instruct?
Claude Haiku 5.5 is cheaper. It lists at $0.10 per million input tokens and $0.50 per million output tokens; Qwen2.5 32B Instruct lists at $0.70 and $2.80.
Is Claude Haiku 5.5 or Qwen2.5 32B Instruct better for coding?
Claude Haiku 5.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 49.2 versus 38.7 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Claude Haiku 5.5 does, with 1M tokens against 131K.
How many benchmarks do Claude Haiku 5.5 and Qwen2.5 32B Instruct share?
2 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Haiku 5.5 has 9 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5 32B Instruct has 7.