Model comparison

GPT-5-Codex vs Qwen2.5-Coder-32B

GPT-5-Codex is the stronger model overall, scoring 37.9 to 33.4 on the Noometry Index. Qwen2.5-Coder-32B costs 4.6× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GPT-5-Codex's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified October 11, 2026. 0 shared benchmarks.

GPT-5-Codex OpenAI

37.9

Rank #192 Reported

Qwen2.5-Coder-32B

Alibaba (Qwen)

33.4

Rank #245 Confirmed

Summary

The widest gap is in coding, where GPT-5-Codex leads 42.4 to 22.6.
Qwen2.5-Coder-32B is cheaper at $0.66 / $1 per million input/output tokens, against $1.25 / $10 for GPT-5-Codex.
GPT-5-Codex accepts more context: 400K tokens versus 33K.
Qwen2.5-Coder-32B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

GPT-5-Codex and Qwen2.5-Coder-32B specifications
	GPT-5-Codex	Qwen2.5-Coder-32B
Provider	OpenAI	Alibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index	37.9	33.4
Released	2025-09-15	2024-09-18
Weights	Proprietary	Open
Context window	400K	33K
Max output	128K	29K
Input $ / M tokens	$1.25	$0.66
Output $ / M tokens	$10	$1
Results tracked	3	31

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

Category by category

Coding GPT-5-Codex leads

GPT-5-Codex: 42.4 (#103), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 22.6 (#333)

Coding benchmarks
Benchmark	GPT-5-Codex	Qwen2.5-Coder-32B
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)	—	9%
Aider Polyglot	—	16.4%
WeirdML	54.5%	—
BigCodeBench Instruct	—	49%
LiveBench Coding	—	56.9%
LMArena Coding	—	1276
BigCodeBench Complete	—	58%
HumanEval+	—	87.2%
MBPP+	—	77%

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

GPT-5-Codex: 31.0 (#72), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
Benchmark	GPT-5-Codex	Qwen2.5-Coder-32B
Terminal-Bench	44.3%	—

Reasoning GPT-5-Codex leads

GPT-5-Codex: 30.9 (#83), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 21.2 (#225)

Reasoning benchmarks
Benchmark	GPT-5-Codex	Qwen2.5-Coder-32B
Kagi LLM Benchmark	70.3%	—
LiveBench Reasoning	—	42.1%
LMArena Hard Prompts	—	1251
LiveBench Data Analysis	—	49.9%
Epoch Capabilities Index	—	119.49
HellaSwag	—	83%
LiveBench	—	46.2%
WinoGrande	—	80.8%

Math Not comparable

GPT-5-Codex: —, Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 33.3 (#204)

Math benchmarks
Benchmark	GPT-5-Codex	Qwen2.5-Coder-32B
LiveBench Math	—	46.6%
LMArena Math	—	1251
GSM8K	—	93%

Knowledge Not comparable

GPT-5-Codex: —, Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 33.4 (#203)

Knowledge benchmarks
Benchmark	GPT-5-Codex	Qwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Expert	—	1221
ARC (AI2) Challenge	—	70.5%
MMLU	—	79.1%

Multilingual Not comparable

GPT-5-Codex: —, Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 37.8 (#235)

Multilingual benchmarks
Benchmark	GPT-5-Codex	Qwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Non-English	—	1205
LMArena Chinese	—	1222
LMArena Russian	—	1228

Instruction Following Not comparable

GPT-5-Codex: —, Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 61.4 (#245)

Instruction Following benchmarks
Benchmark	GPT-5-Codex	Qwen2.5-Coder-32B
LiveBench Instruction Following	—	58.7%
LMArena Instruction Following	—	1223

Long Context Not comparable

GPT-5-Codex: —, Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 38.0 (#208)

Long Context benchmarks
Benchmark	GPT-5-Codex	Qwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Longer Query	—	1251

Writing & Preference Not comparable

GPT-5-Codex: —, Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 41.6 (#240)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
Benchmark	GPT-5-Codex	Qwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Text	—	1230
LMArena Creative Writing	—	1174
LMArena Multi-Turn	—	1222
LiveBench Language	—	23.3%

Frequently asked questions

Is GPT-5-Codex better than Qwen2.5-Coder-32B?

Which is cheaper, GPT-5-Codex 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; GPT-5-Codex lists at $1.25 and $10.

Is GPT-5-Codex or Qwen2.5-Coder-32B better for coding?

GPT-5-Codex scores higher on coding benchmarks: 42.4 versus 22.6 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

GPT-5-Codex does, with 400K tokens against 33K.

How many benchmarks do GPT-5-Codex and Qwen2.5-Coder-32B share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. GPT-5-Codex has 3 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5-Coder-32B has 31.