Model comparison

Granite 3.0 2b Instruct vs Qwen2.5-Coder-32B

Qwen2.5-Coder-32B is the stronger model overall, scoring 33.4 to 30.8 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 13 shared benchmarks.

Granite 3.0 2b Instruct IBM

30.8

Rank #286 Confirmed

Qwen2.5-Coder-32B Alibaba (Qwen)

33.4

Rank #245 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 13 benchmarks with published results for both. Granite 3.0 2b Instruct scores higher in 1 category and Qwen2.5-Coder-32B in 7 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Qwen2.5-Coder-32B leads 41.6 to 29.6.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is BigCodeBench Instruct: 20.5% for Granite 3.0 2b Instruct and 49% for Qwen2.5-Coder-32B.

Side by side

Granite 3.0 2b Instruct and Qwen2.5-Coder-32B specifications
Granite 3.0 2b InstructQwen2.5-Coder-32B
ProviderIBMAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index30.833.4
Released—2024-09-18
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window—33K
Max output—29K
Input $ / M tokens—$0.66
Output $ / M tokens—$1
Results tracked1331

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

Category by category

Coding Granite 3.0 2b Instruct leads

Granite 3.0 2b Instruct: 28.3 (#316), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 22.6 (#333)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.0 2b InstructQwen2.5-Coder-32B
BigCodeBench Instruct20.5%49%
LMArena Coding10901276
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)—9%
Aider Polyglot—16.4%
LiveBench Coding—56.9%
BigCodeBench Complete—58%
HumanEval+—87.2%
MBPP+—77%

Reasoning Too close to call

Granite 3.0 2b Instruct: 20.5 (#235), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 21.2 (#225)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.0 2b InstructQwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Hard Prompts10731251
LiveBench Reasoning—42.1%
LiveBench Data Analysis—49.9%
Epoch Capabilities Index—119.49
HellaSwag—83%
LiveBench—46.2%
WinoGrande—80.8%

Math Qwen2.5-Coder-32B leads

Granite 3.0 2b Instruct: 32.2 (#217), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 33.3 (#204)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.0 2b InstructQwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Math11171251
LiveBench Math—46.6%
GSM8K—93%

Knowledge Qwen2.5-Coder-32B leads

Granite 3.0 2b Instruct: 29.0 (#241), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 33.4 (#203)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.0 2b InstructQwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Expert10641221
ARC (AI2) Challenge—70.5%
MMLU—79.1%

Multilingual Qwen2.5-Coder-32B leads

Granite 3.0 2b Instruct: 27.0 (#278), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 37.8 (#235)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.0 2b InstructQwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Non-English10331205
LMArena Chinese10701222
LMArena Russian10451228

Instruction Following Qwen2.5-Coder-32B leads

Granite 3.0 2b Instruct: 53.9 (#284), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 61.4 (#245)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.0 2b InstructQwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Instruction Following10561223
LiveBench Instruction Following—58.7%

Long Context Qwen2.5-Coder-32B leads

Granite 3.0 2b Instruct: 32.5 (#268), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 38.0 (#208)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.0 2b InstructQwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Longer Query10701251

Writing & Preference Qwen2.5-Coder-32B leads

Granite 3.0 2b Instruct: 29.6 (#292), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 41.6 (#240)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.0 2b InstructQwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Text10801230
LMArena Creative Writing10461174
LMArena Multi-Turn10531222
LiveBench Language—23.3%

Frequently asked questions

Is Granite 3.0 2b Instruct better than Qwen2.5-Coder-32B?

Qwen2.5-Coder-32B is the stronger model overall, scoring 33.4 to 30.8 on the Noometry Index.

Is Granite 3.0 2b Instruct or Qwen2.5-Coder-32B better for coding?

Granite 3.0 2b Instruct scores higher on coding benchmarks: 28.3 versus 22.6 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Granite 3.0 2b Instruct and Qwen2.5-Coder-32B share?

13 benchmarks have published results for both models. Granite 3.0 2b Instruct has 13 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5-Coder-32B has 31.

Related comparisons

Go deeper