Model comparison

GPT-5.2 Codex vs Qwen2.5 7B Instruct

GPT-5.2 Codex is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.6 to 29.0 on the Noometry Index. Qwen2.5 7B Instruct costs 16× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GPT-5.2 Codex's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.

GPT-5.2 Codex OpenAI

42.6

Rank #111 Reported

Qwen2.5 7B Instruct Alibaba (Qwen)

29.0

Rank #320 Confirmed

Summary

  • The widest gap is in agentic & tool use, where GPT-5.2 Codex leads 41.0 to 23.8.
  • Qwen2.5 7B Instruct is cheaper at $0.17 / $0.70 per million input/output tokens, against $1.75 / $14 for GPT-5.2 Codex.
  • GPT-5.2 Codex accepts more context: 400K tokens versus 131K.
  • Qwen2.5 7B Instruct has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

GPT-5.2 Codex and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct specifications
GPT-5.2 CodexQwen2.5 7B Instruct
ProviderOpenAIAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index42.629.0
Released2025-12-182024-09
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window400K131K
Max output128K8K
Input $ / M tokens$1.75$0.17
Output $ / M tokens$14$0.70
Results tracked515

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

Category by category

Coding GPT-5.2 Codex leads

GPT-5.2 Codex: 45.5 (#71), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 36.5 (#208)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.2 CodexQwen2.5 7B Instruct
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)72.8%—
LMArena WebDev1339—
SWE-bench Multilingual66.3%—
BigCodeBench Instruct—37.6%
BigCodeBench Complete—46.1%
ALE-Bench1,300—

Agentic & Tool Use GPT-5.2 Codex leads

GPT-5.2 Codex: 41.0 (#22), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 23.8 (#124)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.2 CodexQwen2.5 7B Instruct
Terminal-Bench66.5%—
BALROG—7.8%

Reasoning Not comparable

GPT-5.2 Codex: —, Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 14.8 (#322)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.2 CodexQwen2.5 7B Instruct
Chess Puzzles—0%
DTBench—47.7%
LMCA—6.4%
Epoch Capabilities Index—118.51

Math Not comparable

GPT-5.2 Codex: —, Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 12.6 (#306)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.2 CodexQwen2.5 7B Instruct
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—2.5%
Omni-MATH—29.4%

Knowledge Not comparable

GPT-5.2 Codex: —, Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 17.0 (#286)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.2 CodexQwen2.5 7B Instruct
GPQA Diamond—35.5%
MMLU-Pro—53.9%
GPQA (HELM)—34.1%
MMLU—72.9%

Instruction Following Not comparable

GPT-5.2 Codex: —, Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 63.2 (#231)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.2 CodexQwen2.5 7B Instruct
IFEval—74.1%

Writing & Preference Not comparable

GPT-5.2 Codex: —, Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 48.8 (#195)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.2 CodexQwen2.5 7B Instruct
WildBench—73.1%

Frequently asked questions

Is GPT-5.2 Codex better than Qwen2.5 7B Instruct?

GPT-5.2 Codex is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.6 to 29.0 on the Noometry Index. Qwen2.5 7B Instruct costs 16× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GPT-5.2 Codex's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, GPT-5.2 Codex or Qwen2.5 7B Instruct?

Qwen2.5 7B Instruct is cheaper. It lists at $0.17 per million input tokens and $0.70 per million output tokens; GPT-5.2 Codex lists at $1.75 and $14.

Is GPT-5.2 Codex or Qwen2.5 7B Instruct better for coding?

GPT-5.2 Codex scores higher on coding benchmarks: 45.5 versus 36.5 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

GPT-5.2 Codex does, with 400K tokens against 131K.

How many benchmarks do GPT-5.2 Codex and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. GPT-5.2 Codex has 5 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct has 15.

Related comparisons

Go deeper