Model comparison
Hunyuan T1 20250711 vs Qwen2.5 32B Instruct
Hunyuan T1 20250711 is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.5 to 30.1 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.
Tencent
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- The widest gap is in math, where Hunyuan T1 20250711 leads 38.7 to 16.2.
- Qwen2.5 32B Instruct has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Hunyuan T1 20250711 | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Tencent | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 42.5 | 30.1 |
| Released | — | 2024-09 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | — | 131K |
| Max output | — | 8K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.70 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $2.80 |
| Results tracked | 13 | 7 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Hunyuan T1 20250711 leads
Hunyuan T1 20250711: 40.9 (#129), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: 38.7 (#169)
| Benchmark | Hunyuan T1 20250711 | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 45% |
| LMArena Coding | 1390 | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 52.3% |
Reasoning Hunyuan T1 20250711 leads
Hunyuan T1 20250711: 28.5 (#103), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: 19.2 (#266)
| Benchmark | Hunyuan T1 20250711 | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Chess Puzzles | — | 0% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1399 | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 128.52 |
Math Hunyuan T1 20250711 leads
Hunyuan T1 20250711: 38.7 (#130), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: 16.2 (#296)
| Benchmark | Hunyuan T1 20250711 | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 7.4% |
| LMArena Math | 1414 | — |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 56.1% |
Knowledge Hunyuan T1 20250711 leads
Hunyuan T1 20250711: 38.8 (#141), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: 24.9 (#266)
| Benchmark | Hunyuan T1 20250711 | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 46.1% |
| LMArena Expert | 1395 | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
Hunyuan T1 20250711: 51.2 (#112), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | Hunyuan T1 20250711 | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1395 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1425 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1406 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1385 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Hunyuan T1 20250711: 72.6 (#138), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | Hunyuan T1 20250711 | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1374 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
Hunyuan T1 20250711: 42.2 (#128), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | Hunyuan T1 20250711 | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1384 | — |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Hunyuan T1 20250711: 59.5 (#109), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | Hunyuan T1 20250711 | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1401 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1392 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1393 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Hunyuan T1 20250711 better than Qwen2.5 32B Instruct?
Hunyuan T1 20250711 is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.5 to 30.1 on the Noometry Index.
Is Hunyuan T1 20250711 or Qwen2.5 32B Instruct better for coding?
Hunyuan T1 20250711 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 40.9 versus 38.7 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Hunyuan T1 20250711 and Qwen2.5 32B Instruct share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Hunyuan T1 20250711 has 13 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5 32B Instruct has 7.