Model comparison

Claude Sonnet 4 vs Qwen2.5 32B Instruct

Claude Sonnet 4 is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.8 to 30.1 on the Noometry Index. Qwen2.5 32B Instruct costs 4.9× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Sonnet 4's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 4 shared benchmarks.

Claude Sonnet 4 Anthropic

40.8

Rank #145 Confirmed

Qwen2.5 32B Instruct Alibaba (Qwen)

30.1

Rank #297 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 4 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Sonnet 4 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 Sonnet 4 leads 43.3 to 16.2.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 71.1% for Claude Sonnet 4 and 7.4% for Qwen2.5 32B Instruct.
  • Qwen2.5 32B Instruct is cheaper at $0.70 / $2.80 per million input/output tokens, against $3 / $15 for Claude Sonnet 4.
  • Claude Sonnet 4 accepts more context: 200K tokens versus 131K.
  • Qwen2.5 32B Instruct has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Claude Sonnet 4 and Qwen2.5 32B Instruct specifications
Claude Sonnet 4Qwen2.5 32B Instruct
ProviderAnthropicAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index40.830.1
Released2025-05-222024-09
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window200K131K
Max output64K8K
Input $ / M tokens$3$0.70
Output $ / M tokens$15$2.80
Results tracked587

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

Category by category

Coding Claude Sonnet 4 leads

Claude Sonnet 4: 43.5 (#88), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: 38.7 (#169)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4Qwen2.5 32B Instruct
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)64.9%—
Aider Polyglot61.3%—
SciCode40%—
GSO4.9%—
WeirdML46.1%—
BigCodeBench Instruct—45%
LMArena Coding1414—
BigCodeBench Complete—52.3%
ALE-Bench655.35—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Claude Sonnet 4: 38.5 (#31), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4Qwen2.5 32B Instruct
TheAgentCompany33.1%—
Cybench35%—
DeepResearch Bench46.6%—
OSWorld43.9%—
METR Time Horizons62%—

Reasoning Claude Sonnet 4 leads

Claude Sonnet 4: 22.9 (#187), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: 19.2 (#266)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4Qwen2.5 32B Instruct
Epoch Capabilities Index141.69128.52
ARC-AGI-25.9%—
SimpleBench45.5%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark73%—
ARC-AGI-140%—
CritPt0.3%—
Chess Puzzles—0%
EnigmaEval3.1%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1372—
DTBench77.1%—
LMCA29%—
ForecastBench60.2—

Math Claude Sonnet 4 leads

Claude Sonnet 4: 43.3 (#80), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: 16.2 (#296)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4Qwen2.5 32B Instruct
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202571.1%7.4%
MATH Level 584.4%56.1%
Omni-MATH60.2%—
LMArena Math1375—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)4.1%—
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)0%—

Knowledge Claude Sonnet 4 leads

Claude Sonnet 4: 41.8 (#108), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: 24.9 (#266)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4Qwen2.5 32B Instruct
GPQA Diamond79.2%46.1%
Humanity's Last Exam7.8%—
MMLU-Pro84.3%—
Confabulations13.2%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate10.3%—
GPQA (HELM)70.6%—
LMArena Expert1372—

Multimodal Not comparable

Claude Sonnet 4: 26.2 (#121), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: —

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4Qwen2.5 32B Instruct
LMArena Vision1191—
GeoBench37%—
VPCT34%—
MindCube44.8%—

Multilingual Not comparable

Claude Sonnet 4: 46.7 (#156), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: —

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4Qwen2.5 32B Instruct
LMArena Non-English1333—
LMArena Chinese1350—
LMArena French1363—
LMArena German1331—
LMArena Japanese1302—
LMArena Korean1291—
LMArena Russian1355—
LMArena Spanish1357—

Instruction Following Not comparable

Claude Sonnet 4: 71.7 (#145), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: —

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4Qwen2.5 32B Instruct
IFEval84%—
LMArena Instruction Following1376—

Long Context Not comparable

Claude Sonnet 4: 33.7 (#259), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: —

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4Qwen2.5 32B Instruct
Fiction.LiveBench46.9%—
LMArena Longer Query1398—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Claude Sonnet 4: 57.1 (#132), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: —

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4Qwen2.5 32B Instruct
LMArena Text1351—
LMArena Creative Writing1345—
Short-Story Creative Writing81.4%—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1483—
WildBench83.8%—
LMArena Multi-Turn1376—

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Sonnet 4 better than Qwen2.5 32B Instruct?

Claude Sonnet 4 is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.8 to 30.1 on the Noometry Index. Qwen2.5 32B Instruct costs 4.9× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Sonnet 4's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, Claude Sonnet 4 or Qwen2.5 32B Instruct?

Qwen2.5 32B Instruct is cheaper. It lists at $0.70 per million input tokens and $2.80 per million output tokens; Claude Sonnet 4 lists at $3 and $15.

Is Claude Sonnet 4 or Qwen2.5 32B Instruct better for coding?

Claude Sonnet 4 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 43.5 versus 38.7 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Claude Sonnet 4 does, with 200K tokens against 131K.

How many benchmarks do Claude Sonnet 4 and Qwen2.5 32B Instruct share?

4 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Sonnet 4 has 58 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5 32B Instruct has 7.

Related comparisons

Go deeper