Model comparison
Magistral Small vs Qwen2.5-Max
Qwen2.5-Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.7 to 30.2 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 1 shared benchmarks.
Mistral AI
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 1 benchmark with published results for both. Magistral Small scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen2.5-Max in 4 categories; 4 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Qwen2.5-Max leads 25.6 to 6.8.
- Magistral Small has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Magistral Small | Qwen2.5-Max | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Mistral AI | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 30.2 | 40.7 |
| Released | 2025-06-10 | 2025-01-25 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | 128K | — |
| Max output | 40K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.50 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $1.50 | — |
| Results tracked | 10 | 27 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Qwen2.5-Max leads
Magistral Small: 38.4 (#176), Qwen2.5-Max: 41.8 (#117)
| Benchmark | Magistral Small | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | 35.2% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | — | 64.4% |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1359 |
Reasoning Qwen2.5-Max leads
Magistral Small: 6.8 (#350), Qwen2.5-Max: 25.6 (#147)
| Benchmark | Magistral Small | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 133.19 | 132.53 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 0% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 6.3% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 5% | — |
| CritPt | 0.3% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 3% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | — | 51.4% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1360 |
| DTBench | 61.3% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | — | 67.9% |
| LiveBench | — | 62.3% |
Math Qwen2.5-Max leads
Magistral Small: 26.2 (#261), Qwen2.5-Max: 36.9 (#162)
| Benchmark | Magistral Small | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 30% | — |
| LiveBench Math | — | 58.4% |
| LMArena Math | — | 1369 |
Knowledge Qwen2.5-Max leads
Magistral Small: 30.9 (#223), Qwen2.5-Max: 35.3 (#186)
| Benchmark | Magistral Small | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 56.1% | — |
| Confabulations | — | 21.8% |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1337 |
Multilingual Not comparable
Magistral Small: —, Qwen2.5-Max: 48.1 (#146)
| Benchmark | Magistral Small | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1352 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1382 |
| LMArena French | — | 1396 |
| LMArena German | — | 1350 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1300 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1304 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1353 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1377 |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Magistral Small: —, Qwen2.5-Max: 71.3 (#152)
| Benchmark | Magistral Small | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Instruction Following | — | 75.3% |
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1335 |
Long Context Not comparable
Magistral Small: —, Qwen2.5-Max: 41.4 (#142)
| Benchmark | Magistral Small | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1358 |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Magistral Small: —, Qwen2.5-Max: 55.4 (#146)
| Benchmark | Magistral Small | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1367 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1339 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | — | 72.9% |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1364 |
| LiveBench Language | — | 56.3% |
Frequently asked questions
Is Magistral Small better than Qwen2.5-Max?
Qwen2.5-Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.7 to 30.2 on the Noometry Index.
Is Magistral Small or Qwen2.5-Max better for coding?
Qwen2.5-Max scores higher on coding benchmarks: 41.8 versus 38.4 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Magistral Small and Qwen2.5-Max share?
1 benchmark has published results for both models. Magistral Small has 10 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5-Max has 27.