Noometry

Model comparison

Hunyuan Turbos 20250226 vs Qwen2.5-Coder-32B

Hunyuan Turbos 20250226 is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.3 to 33.4 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 12 shared benchmarks.

Hunyuan Turbos 20250226 Tencent

41.3

Rank #139 Confirmed

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

33.4

Rank #245 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. Hunyuan Turbos 20250226 scores higher in 8 categories and Qwen2.5-Coder-32B in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in coding, where Hunyuan Turbos 20250226 leads 40.0 to 22.6.
  • Qwen2.5-Coder-32B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Hunyuan Turbos 20250226Qwen2.5-Coder-32B
ProviderTencentAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index41.333.4
Released—2024-09-18
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window—33K
Max output—29K
Input $ / M tokens—$0.66
Output $ / M tokens—$1
Results tracked1631

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

Category by category

Coding Hunyuan Turbos 20250226 leads

Hunyuan Turbos 20250226: 40.0 (#152), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 22.6 (#333)

BenchmarkHunyuan Turbos 20250226Qwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Coding13611276
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)—9%
Aider Polyglot—16.4%
BigCodeBench Instruct—49%
LiveBench Coding—56.9%
BigCodeBench Complete—58%
HumanEval+—87.2%
MBPP+—77%

Reasoning Hunyuan Turbos 20250226 leads

Hunyuan Turbos 20250226: 27.8 (#113), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 21.2 (#225)

BenchmarkHunyuan Turbos 20250226Qwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Hard Prompts13741251
LiveBench Reasoning—42.1%
LiveBench Data Analysis—49.9%
Epoch Capabilities Index—119.49
HellaSwag—83%
LiveBench—46.2%
WinoGrande—80.8%

Math Hunyuan Turbos 20250226 leads

Hunyuan Turbos 20250226: 37.5 (#154), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 33.3 (#204)

BenchmarkHunyuan Turbos 20250226Qwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Math13591251
LiveBench Math—46.6%
GSM8K—93%

Knowledge Hunyuan Turbos 20250226 leads

Hunyuan Turbos 20250226: 37.0 (#161), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 33.4 (#203)

BenchmarkHunyuan Turbos 20250226Qwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Expert13391221
ARC (AI2) Challenge—70.5%
MMLU—79.1%

Multilingual Hunyuan Turbos 20250226 leads

Hunyuan Turbos 20250226: 48.9 (#136), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 37.8 (#235)

BenchmarkHunyuan Turbos 20250226Qwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Non-English13631205
LMArena Chinese14171222
LMArena Russian13681228
LMArena French1391—
LMArena German1355—
LMArena Japanese1342—
LMArena Korean1351—

Instruction Following Hunyuan Turbos 20250226 leads

Hunyuan Turbos 20250226: 71.0 (#158), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 61.4 (#245)

BenchmarkHunyuan Turbos 20250226Qwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Instruction Following13441223
LiveBench Instruction Following—58.7%

Long Context Hunyuan Turbos 20250226 leads

Hunyuan Turbos 20250226: 41.6 (#136), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 38.0 (#208)

BenchmarkHunyuan Turbos 20250226Qwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Longer Query13661251

Writing & Preference Hunyuan Turbos 20250226 leads

Hunyuan Turbos 20250226: 57.4 (#128), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 41.6 (#240)

BenchmarkHunyuan Turbos 20250226Qwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Text13771230
LMArena Creative Writing13591174
LMArena Multi-Turn13871222
LiveBench Language—23.3%

Frequently asked questions

Is Hunyuan Turbos 20250226 better than Qwen2.5-Coder-32B?

Hunyuan Turbos 20250226 is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.3 to 33.4 on the Noometry Index.

Is Hunyuan Turbos 20250226 or Qwen2.5-Coder-32B better for coding?

Hunyuan Turbos 20250226 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 40.0 versus 22.6 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Hunyuan Turbos 20250226 and Qwen2.5-Coder-32B share?

12 benchmarks have published results for both models. Hunyuan Turbos 20250226 has 16 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5-Coder-32B has 31.

Related comparisons

Go deeper