Noometry

Model comparison

Grok 3 vs Qwen2.5-Coder-32B

Grok 3 is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.9 to 33.4 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 14 shared benchmarks.

Grok 3 xAI

39.9

Rank #157 Confirmed

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

33.4

Rank #245 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 14 benchmarks with published results for both. Grok 3 scores higher in 7 categories and Qwen2.5-Coder-32B in 1 category; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in coding, where Grok 3 leads 41.9 to 22.6.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is Aider Polyglot: 53.3% for Grok 3 and 16.4% for Qwen2.5-Coder-32B.
  • Qwen2.5-Coder-32B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Grok 3Qwen2.5-Coder-32B
ProviderxAIAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index39.933.4
Released2025-04-092024-09-18
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window—33K
Max output—29K
Input $ / M tokens—$0.66
Output $ / M tokens—$1
Results tracked4031

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

Category by category

Coding Grok 3 leads

Grok 3: 41.9 (#115), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 22.6 (#333)

BenchmarkGrok 3Qwen2.5-Coder-32B
Aider Polyglot53.3%16.4%
LMArena Coding14321276
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)—9%
WeirdML37.2%—
BigCodeBench Instruct—49%
LiveBench Coding—56.9%
BigCodeBench Complete—58%
HumanEval+—87.2%
MBPP+—77%

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Grok 3: 30.5 (#76), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: —

BenchmarkGrok 3Qwen2.5-Coder-32B
BALROG29.5%—

Reasoning Qwen2.5-Coder-32B leads

Grok 3: 13.7 (#333), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 21.2 (#225)

BenchmarkGrok 3Qwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Hard Prompts14341251
Epoch Capabilities Index138.33119.49
ARC-AGI-20%—
SimpleBench36.1%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark61.3%—
ARC-AGI-15.5%—
LiveBench Reasoning—42.1%
LiveBench Data Analysis—49.9%
HellaSwag—83%
LiveBench—46.2%
WinoGrande—80.8%

Math Grok 3 leads

Grok 3: 38.0 (#145), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 33.3 (#204)

BenchmarkGrok 3Qwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Math13911251
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202555.6%—
Omni-MATH46.4%—
LiveBench Math—46.6%
MATH Level 588.7%—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)3.8%—
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)0%—
GSM8K—93%

Knowledge Grok 3 leads

Grok 3: 46.2 (#82), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 33.4 (#203)

BenchmarkGrok 3Qwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Expert14211221
GPQA Diamond75.8%—
MMLU-Pro78.8%—
Confabulations14.2%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate5.8%—
GPQA (HELM)65%—
ARC (AI2) Challenge—70.5%
MMLU—79.1%

Multilingual Grok 3 leads

Grok 3: 52.3 (#87), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 37.8 (#235)

BenchmarkGrok 3Qwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Non-English14101205
LMArena Chinese14481222
LMArena Russian14161228
LMArena French1460—
LMArena German1431—
LMArena Japanese1387—
LMArena Korean1373—
LMArena Spanish1417—

Instruction Following Grok 3 leads

Grok 3: 75.0 (#73), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 61.4 (#245)

BenchmarkGrok 3Qwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Instruction Following14091223
LiveBench Instruction Following—58.7%
IFEval88.4%—

Long Context Too close to call

Grok 3: 38.7 (#192), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 38.0 (#208)

BenchmarkGrok 3Qwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Longer Query14391251
Fiction.LiveBench58.3%—

Writing & Preference Grok 3 leads

Grok 3: 55.8 (#141), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 41.6 (#240)

BenchmarkGrok 3Qwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Text14261230
LMArena Creative Writing14141174
LMArena Multi-Turn14251222
Short-Story Creative Writing76.4%—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1186—
WildBench84.9%—
LiveBench Language—23.3%

Frequently asked questions

Is Grok 3 better than Qwen2.5-Coder-32B?

Grok 3 is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.9 to 33.4 on the Noometry Index.

Is Grok 3 or Qwen2.5-Coder-32B better for coding?

Grok 3 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 41.9 versus 22.6 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Grok 3 and Qwen2.5-Coder-32B share?

14 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok 3 has 40 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5-Coder-32B has 31.

Related comparisons

Go deeper