Model comparison
Qwen1.5-14B vs Qwen2.5-Coder-32B
Qwen1.5-14B and Qwen2.5-Coder-32B score almost the same on the Noometry Index (32.7 vs 33.4), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Last verified . 13 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 13 benchmarks with published results for both. Qwen1.5-14B scores higher in 2 categories and Qwen2.5-Coder-32B in 6 categories; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in coding, where Qwen1.5-14B leads 33.1 to 22.6.
Side by side
| Qwen1.5-14B | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 32.7 | 33.4 |
| Released | 2024-02-04 | 2024-09-18 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | — | 33K |
| Max output | — | 29K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.66 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $1 |
| Results tracked | 17 | 31 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Qwen1.5-14B leads
Qwen1.5-14B: 33.1 (#263), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 22.6 (#333)
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-14B | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1138 | 1276 |
| 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 Too close to call
Qwen1.5-14B: 21.4 (#223), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 21.2 (#225)
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-14B | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1113 | 1251 |
| LiveBench Reasoning | — | 42.1% |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | — | 49.9% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 119.49 |
| HellaSwag | — | 83% |
| LiveBench | — | 46.2% |
| WinoGrande | — | 80.8% |
Math Too close to call
Qwen1.5-14B: 32.4 (#215), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 33.3 (#204)
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-14B | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1125 | 1251 |
| LiveBench Math | — | 46.6% |
| GSM8K | — | 93% |
Knowledge Qwen2.5-Coder-32B leads
Qwen1.5-14B: 29.8 (#232), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 33.4 (#203)
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-14B | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1094 | 1221 |
| MMLU | 68.6% | 79.1% |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | — | 70.5% |
Multilingual Qwen2.5-Coder-32B leads
Qwen1.5-14B: 30.7 (#262), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 37.8 (#235)
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-14B | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1095 | 1205 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1147 | 1222 |
| LMArena Russian | 1046 | 1228 |
| LMArena French | 1116 | — |
| LMArena German | 1043 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1019 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1085 | — |
Instruction Following Qwen2.5-Coder-32B leads
Qwen1.5-14B: 56.8 (#271), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 61.4 (#245)
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-14B | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1102 | 1223 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | — | 58.7% |
Long Context Qwen2.5-Coder-32B leads
Qwen1.5-14B: 33.7 (#257), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 38.0 (#208)
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-14B | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1113 | 1251 |
Writing & Preference Qwen2.5-Coder-32B leads
Qwen1.5-14B: 33.6 (#276), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 41.6 (#240)
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-14B | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1128 | 1230 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1091 | 1174 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1110 | 1222 |
| LiveBench Language | — | 23.3% |
Frequently asked questions
Is Qwen1.5-14B better than Qwen2.5-Coder-32B?
Qwen1.5-14B and Qwen2.5-Coder-32B score almost the same on the Noometry Index (32.7 vs 33.4), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Is Qwen1.5-14B or Qwen2.5-Coder-32B better for coding?
Qwen1.5-14B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 33.1 versus 22.6 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Qwen1.5-14B and Qwen2.5-Coder-32B share?
13 benchmarks have published results for both models. Qwen1.5-14B has 17 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5-Coder-32B has 31.