Noometry

Model comparison

Qwen Plus vs Qwen2.5-Coder-32B

Qwen Plus is the stronger model overall, scoring 37.1 to 33.4 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 12 shared benchmarks.

Qwen Plus Alibaba (Qwen)

37.1

Rank #210 Confirmed

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

33.4

Rank #245 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. Qwen Plus scores higher in 6 categories and Qwen2.5-Coder-32B in 2 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in coding, where Qwen Plus leads 38.9 to 22.6.
  • Qwen Plus is cheaper at $0.40 / $1.20 per million input/output tokens, against $0.66 / $1 for Qwen2.5-Coder-32B.
  • Qwen Plus accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 33K.
  • Qwen2.5-Coder-32B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Qwen PlusQwen2.5-Coder-32B
ProviderAlibaba (Qwen)Alibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index37.133.4
Released2024-01-252024-09-18
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1M33K
Max output33K29K
Input $ / M tokens$0.40$0.66
Output $ / M tokens$1.20$1
Results tracked2031

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

Category by category

Coding Qwen Plus leads

Qwen Plus: 38.9 (#167), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 22.6 (#333)

BenchmarkQwen PlusQwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Coding13281276
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 Qwen Plus leads

Qwen Plus: 28.4 (#107), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 21.2 (#225)

BenchmarkQwen PlusQwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Hard Prompts13171251
Kagi LLM Benchmark63.3%—
LiveBench Reasoning—42.1%
DTBench81.1%—
LiveBench Data Analysis—49.9%
LMCA24%—
Epoch Capabilities Index—119.49
HellaSwag—83%
LiveBench—46.2%
WinoGrande—80.8%

Math Qwen2.5-Coder-32B leads

Qwen Plus: 23.3 (#271), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 33.3 (#204)

BenchmarkQwen PlusQwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Math13261251
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202517.8%—
LiveBench Math—46.6%
MATH Level 565.3%—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)1.7%—
GSM8K—93%

Knowledge Qwen2.5-Coder-32B leads

Qwen Plus: 27.4 (#251), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 33.4 (#203)

BenchmarkQwen PlusQwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Expert13281221
GPQA Diamond48.1%—
ARC (AI2) Challenge—70.5%
MMLU—79.1%

Multilingual Qwen Plus leads

Qwen Plus: 45.1 (#175), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 37.8 (#235)

BenchmarkQwen PlusQwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Non-English13101205
LMArena Chinese13471222
LMArena Russian13231228
LMArena Japanese1251—

Instruction Following Qwen Plus leads

Qwen Plus: 68.8 (#181), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 61.4 (#245)

BenchmarkQwen PlusQwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Instruction Following13031223
LiveBench Instruction Following—58.7%

Long Context Qwen Plus leads

Qwen Plus: 40.3 (#158), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 38.0 (#208)

BenchmarkQwen PlusQwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Longer Query13241251

Writing & Preference Qwen Plus leads

Qwen Plus: 52.2 (#176), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 41.6 (#240)

BenchmarkQwen PlusQwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Text13261230
LMArena Creative Writing12931174
LMArena Multi-Turn13361222
LiveBench Language—23.3%

Frequently asked questions

Is Qwen Plus better than Qwen2.5-Coder-32B?

Qwen Plus is the stronger model overall, scoring 37.1 to 33.4 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, Qwen Plus or Qwen2.5-Coder-32B?

Qwen Plus is cheaper. It lists at $0.40 per million input tokens and $1.20 per million output tokens; Qwen2.5-Coder-32B lists at $0.66 and $1.

Is Qwen Plus or Qwen2.5-Coder-32B better for coding?

Qwen Plus scores higher on coding benchmarks: 38.9 versus 22.6 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen Plus does, with 1M tokens against 33K.

How many benchmarks do Qwen Plus and Qwen2.5-Coder-32B share?

12 benchmarks have published results for both models. Qwen Plus has 20 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5-Coder-32B has 31.

Related comparisons

Go deeper