Model comparison
Codestral vs Qwen2.5 32B Instruct
Codestral and Qwen2.5 32B Instruct score almost the same on the Noometry Index (30.6 vs 30.1), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Last verified . 2 shared benchmarks.
Mistral AI
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 2 benchmarks with published results for both. Codestral scores higher in 1 category and Qwen2.5 32B Instruct in 1 category; one gap is clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in coding, where Qwen2.5 32B Instruct leads 38.7 to 27.3.
- Codestral is cheaper at $0.30 / $0.90 per million input/output tokens, against $0.70 / $2.80 for Qwen2.5 32B Instruct.
- Codestral accepts more context: 256K tokens versus 131K.
- Qwen2.5 32B Instruct has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Codestral | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Mistral AI | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 30.6 | 30.1 |
| Released | 2024-05-29 | 2024-09 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 256K | 131K |
| Max output | 8K | 8K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.30 | $0.70 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.90 | $2.80 |
| Results tracked | 7 | 7 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Qwen2.5 32B Instruct leads
Codestral: 27.3 (#321), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: 38.7 (#169)
| Benchmark | Codestral | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 41.8% | 45% |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 52.5% | 52.3% |
| Aider Polyglot | 11.1% | — |
| ALE-Bench | 137.78 | — |
| HumanEval+ | 73.8% | — |
| MBPP+ | 61.9% | — |
Reasoning Too close to call
Codestral: 19.8 (#251), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: 19.2 (#266)
| Benchmark | Codestral | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 32.5% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 0% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 128.52 |
Math Not comparable
Codestral: —, Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: 16.2 (#296)
| Benchmark | Codestral | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 7.4% |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 56.1% |
Knowledge Not comparable
Codestral: —, Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: 24.9 (#266)
| Benchmark | Codestral | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 46.1% |
Frequently asked questions
Is Codestral better than Qwen2.5 32B Instruct?
Codestral and Qwen2.5 32B Instruct score almost the same on the Noometry Index (30.6 vs 30.1), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Which is cheaper, Codestral or Qwen2.5 32B Instruct?
Codestral is cheaper. It lists at $0.30 per million input tokens and $0.90 per million output tokens; Qwen2.5 32B Instruct lists at $0.70 and $2.80.
Is Codestral or Qwen2.5 32B Instruct better for coding?
Qwen2.5 32B Instruct scores higher on coding benchmarks: 38.7 versus 27.3 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Codestral does, with 256K tokens against 131K.
How many benchmarks do Codestral and Qwen2.5 32B Instruct share?
2 benchmarks have published results for both models. Codestral has 7 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5 32B Instruct has 7.