Model comparison
GPT-5.4 Pro vs Qwen2.5 32B Instruct
GPT-5.4 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 58.9 to 30.1 on the Noometry Index. Qwen2.5 32B Instruct costs 55× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GPT-5.4 Pro's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 3 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 3 benchmarks with published results for both. GPT-5.4 Pro 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 GPT-5.4 Pro leads 72.4 to 16.2.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is Chess Puzzles: 58.6% for GPT-5.4 Pro and 0% for Qwen2.5 32B Instruct.
- Qwen2.5 32B Instruct is cheaper at $0.70 / $2.80 per million input/output tokens, against $30 / $180 for GPT-5.4 Pro.
- GPT-5.4 Pro accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 131K.
- Qwen2.5 32B Instruct has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| GPT-5.4 Pro | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenAI | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 58.9 | 30.1 |
| Released | 2026-03-05 | 2024-09 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 1.05M | 131K |
| Max output | 128K | 8K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $30 | $0.70 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $180 | $2.80 |
| Results tracked | 16 | 7 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding GPT-5.4 Pro leads
GPT-5.4 Pro: 43.2 (#90), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: 38.7 (#169)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 Pro | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| WeirdML | 57.4% | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 45% |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 52.3% |
Reasoning GPT-5.4 Pro leads
GPT-5.4 Pro: 70.7 (#13), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: 19.2 (#266)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 Pro | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Chess Puzzles | 58.6% | 0% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 158.93 | 128.52 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 83.3% | — |
| SimpleBench | 74.1% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 94.5% | — |
| CritPt | 30% | — |
| EnigmaEval | 23.8% | — |
Math GPT-5.4 Pro leads
GPT-5.4 Pro: 72.4 (#22), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: 16.2 (#296)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 Pro | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 82.5% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 58.5% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 7.4% |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 56.1% |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 50% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 37.5% | — |
Knowledge GPT-5.4 Pro leads
GPT-5.4 Pro: 68.3 (#7), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: 24.9 (#266)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 Pro | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 94.6% | 46.1% |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 44.3% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | 46.3% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 8.3% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is GPT-5.4 Pro better than Qwen2.5 32B Instruct?
GPT-5.4 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 58.9 to 30.1 on the Noometry Index. Qwen2.5 32B Instruct costs 55× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GPT-5.4 Pro's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, GPT-5.4 Pro 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; GPT-5.4 Pro lists at $30 and $180.
Is GPT-5.4 Pro or Qwen2.5 32B Instruct better for coding?
GPT-5.4 Pro scores higher on coding benchmarks: 43.2 versus 38.7 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
GPT-5.4 Pro does, with 1.05M tokens against 131K.
How many benchmarks do GPT-5.4 Pro and Qwen2.5 32B Instruct share?
3 benchmarks have published results for both models. GPT-5.4 Pro has 16 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5 32B Instruct has 7.