Noometry

Model comparison

Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs Qwen2.5-Coder-32B

Claude Sonnet 4.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 44.1 to 33.4 on the Noometry Index. Qwen2.5-Coder-32B costs 8.1× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Sonnet 4.5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 14 shared benchmarks.

Claude Sonnet 4.5 Anthropic

44.1

Rank #81 Confirmed

Qwen2.5-Coder-32B Alibaba (Qwen)

33.4

Rank #245 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 14 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Sonnet 4.5 scores higher in 7 categories and Qwen2.5-Coder-32B in 1 category; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Claude Sonnet 4.5 leads 66.5 to 41.6.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is SWE-bench Verified (bash only): 71.4% for Claude Sonnet 4.5 and 9% for Qwen2.5-Coder-32B.
  • Qwen2.5-Coder-32B is cheaper at $0.66 / $1 per million input/output tokens, against $3 / $15 for Claude Sonnet 4.5.
  • Claude Sonnet 4.5 accepts more context: 200K tokens versus 33K.
  • Qwen2.5-Coder-32B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Claude Sonnet 4.5Qwen2.5-Coder-32B
ProviderAnthropicAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index44.133.4
Released2025-09-292024-09-18
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window200K33K
Max output64K29K
Input $ / M tokens$3$0.66
Output $ / M tokens$15$1
Results tracked7331

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding Claude Sonnet 4.5 leads

Claude Sonnet 4.5: 47.3 (#61), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 22.6 (#333)

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.5Qwen2.5-Coder-32B
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)71.4%9%
LMArena Coding14891276
SWE-bench Verified71.3%—
Aider Polyglot—16.4%
LMArena WebDev1393—
SWE-bench Multilingual67%—
SciCode44.7%—
GSO14.7%—
WeirdML47.7%—
BigCodeBench Instruct—49%
LiveBench Coding—56.9%
BigCodeBench Complete—58%
ALE-Bench796.15—
AlgoTune1.52—
HumanEval+—87.2%
MBPP+—77%

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Claude Sonnet 4.5: 38.3 (#32), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: —

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.5Qwen2.5-Coder-32B
Terminal-Bench46.5%—
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard73.2%—
GDPval42.5%—
Remote Labor Index2.1%—
τ²-bench Airline72%—
τ²-bench Banking25.3%—
τ²-bench Retail72.4%—
τ²-bench Telecom84.9%—
Cybench60%—
DeepResearch Bench52.6%—
OSWorld62.9%—
LMArena Search1159—
METR Time Horizons67.4%—
Vending-Bench 23,839—

Reasoning Claude Sonnet 4.5 leads

Claude Sonnet 4.5: 26.9 (#125), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 21.2 (#225)

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.5Qwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Hard Prompts14621251
Epoch Capabilities Index146.84119.49
ARC-AGI-213.6%—
SimpleBench54.3%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark57.9%—
NYT Connections (extended)37.3%—
ARC-AGI-163.7%—
CritPt1.1%—
Chess Puzzles12%—
EnigmaEval6%—
EBR-Bench2.4%—
LiveBench Reasoning—42.1%
Mystery Game Puzzles17%—
DTBench83.2%—
LiveBench Data Analysis—49.9%
LMCA38.8%—
ForecastBench61.9—
HellaSwag—83%
LiveBench—46.2%
WinoGrande—80.8%

Math Qwen2.5-Coder-32B leads

Claude Sonnet 4.5: 32.3 (#216), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 33.3 (#204)

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.5Qwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Math14491251
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)23.9%—
FrontierMath Tier 42.4%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202577.8%—
ProofBench19%—
Omni-MATH55.3%—
LiveBench Math—46.6%
MATH Level 597.7%—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)15.2%—
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)4.2%—
GSM8K—93%

Knowledge Claude Sonnet 4.5 leads

Claude Sonnet 4.5: 48.4 (#76), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 33.4 (#203)

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.5Qwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Expert14821221
GPQA Diamond82.3%—
Humanity's Last Exam13.7%—
SimpleQA Verified30.7%—
MMLU-Pro86.9%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate12%—
GPQA (HELM)68.6%—
ARC (AI2) Challenge—70.5%
MMLU—79.1%

Multimodal Not comparable

Claude Sonnet 4.5: 34.8 (#89), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: —

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.5Qwen2.5-Coder-32B
VPCT39.8%—
LMArena Document1450—

Multilingual Claude Sonnet 4.5 leads

Claude Sonnet 4.5: 53.4 (#69), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 37.8 (#235)

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.5Qwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Non-English14251205
LMArena Chinese14591222
LMArena Russian14371228
LMArena French1458—
LMArena German1427—
LMArena Japanese1390—
LMArena Korean1403—
LMArena Spanish1457—

Instruction Following Claude Sonnet 4.5 leads

Claude Sonnet 4.5: 75.0 (#78), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 61.4 (#245)

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.5Qwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Instruction Following14591223
LiveBench Instruction Following—58.7%
IFEval85%—

Long Context Claude Sonnet 4.5 leads

Claude Sonnet 4.5: 45.2 (#46), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 38.0 (#208)

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.5Qwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Longer Query14761251

Writing & Preference Claude Sonnet 4.5 leads

Claude Sonnet 4.5: 66.5 (#34), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 41.6 (#240)

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.5Qwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Text14391230
LMArena Creative Writing14421174
LMArena Multi-Turn14651222
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1678—
WildBench85.4%—
LiveBench Language—23.3%

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Sonnet 4.5 better than Qwen2.5-Coder-32B?

Claude Sonnet 4.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 44.1 to 33.4 on the Noometry Index. Qwen2.5-Coder-32B costs 8.1× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Sonnet 4.5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, Claude Sonnet 4.5 or Qwen2.5-Coder-32B?

Qwen2.5-Coder-32B is cheaper. It lists at $0.66 per million input tokens and $1 per million output tokens; Claude Sonnet 4.5 lists at $3 and $15.

Is Claude Sonnet 4.5 or Qwen2.5-Coder-32B better for coding?

Claude Sonnet 4.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 47.3 versus 22.6 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Claude Sonnet 4.5 does, with 200K tokens against 33K.

How many benchmarks do Claude Sonnet 4.5 and Qwen2.5-Coder-32B share?

14 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Sonnet 4.5 has 73 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5-Coder-32B has 31.

Related comparisons

Go deeper