Model comparison
GPT-5 Pro vs Qwen2.5-Coder-32B
GPT-5 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 46.2 to 32.9 on the Noometry Index. Qwen2.5-Coder-32B costs 55× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GPT-5 Pro's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 1 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 1 benchmark with published results for both. GPT-5 Pro scores higher in 4 categories and Qwen2.5-Coder-32B in 0 categories; 4 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where GPT-5 Pro leads 56.2 to 32.9.
- Qwen2.5-Coder-32B is cheaper at $0.66 / $1 per million input/output tokens, against $15 / $120 for GPT-5 Pro.
- GPT-5 Pro 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 Pro | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenAI | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 46.2 | 32.9 |
| Released | 2025-10-06 | 2024-09-18 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 400K | 33K |
| Max output | 272K | 29K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $15 | $0.66 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $120 | $1 |
| Results tracked | 12 | 31 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding GPT-5 Pro leads
GPT-5 Pro: 43.4 (#77), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 22.4 (#328)
| Benchmark | GPT-5 Pro | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | — | 9% |
| Aider Polyglot | — | 16.4% |
| WeirdML | 60.4% | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 49% |
| LiveBench Coding | — | 56.9% |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1276 |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 58% |
| AlgoTune | 1.31 | — |
| HumanEval+ | — | 87.2% |
| MBPP+ | — | 77% |
Reasoning GPT-5 Pro leads
GPT-5 Pro: 39.2 (#52), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 20.4 (#220)
| Benchmark | GPT-5 Pro | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 150.26 | 119.41 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 18.3% | — |
| SimpleBench | 61.6% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 76.8% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 70.2% | — |
| EnigmaEval | 18.8% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | — | 42.1% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1251 |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | — | 49.9% |
| HellaSwag | — | 83% |
| LiveBench | — | 46.2% |
| WinoGrande | — | 80.8% |
Math GPT-5 Pro leads
GPT-5 Pro: 48.0 (#53), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 30.8 (#203)
| Benchmark | GPT-5 Pro | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 55.8% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 19.5% | — |
| LiveBench Math | — | 46.6% |
| LMArena Math | — | 1251 |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 14.6% | — |
| GSM8K | — | 93% |
Knowledge GPT-5 Pro leads
GPT-5 Pro: 56.2 (#39), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 32.9 (#200)
| Benchmark | GPT-5 Pro | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| Humanity's Last Exam | 31.6% | — |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1221 |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | — | 70.5% |
| MMLU | — | 79.1% |
Multilingual Not comparable
GPT-5 Pro: —, Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 38.0 (#230)
| Benchmark | GPT-5 Pro | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1205 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1222 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1228 |
Instruction Following Not comparable
GPT-5 Pro: —, Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 61.6 (#240)
| Benchmark | GPT-5 Pro | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Instruction Following | — | 58.7% |
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1223 |
Long Context Not comparable
GPT-5 Pro: —, Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 37.9 (#204)
| Benchmark | GPT-5 Pro | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1251 |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
GPT-5 Pro: —, Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 41.8 (#235)
| Benchmark | GPT-5 Pro | 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 Pro better than Qwen2.5-Coder-32B?
GPT-5 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 46.2 to 32.9 on the Noometry Index. Qwen2.5-Coder-32B costs 55× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GPT-5 Pro's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, GPT-5 Pro 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 Pro lists at $15 and $120.
Is GPT-5 Pro or Qwen2.5-Coder-32B better for coding?
GPT-5 Pro scores higher on coding benchmarks: 43.4 versus 22.4 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
GPT-5 Pro does, with 400K tokens against 33K.
How many benchmarks do GPT-5 Pro and Qwen2.5-Coder-32B share?
1 benchmark has published results for both models. GPT-5 Pro has 12 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5-Coder-32B has 31.