Model comparison
Qwen1.5 4b Chat vs Qwen2.5 32B Instruct
Qwen2.5 32B Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 30.1 to 28.8 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- The widest gap is in math, where Qwen1.5 4b Chat leads 30.4 to 16.2.
Side by side
| Qwen1.5 4b Chat | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 28.8 | 30.1 |
| Released | — | 2024-09 |
| Weights | Open | 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 Qwen2.5 32B Instruct leads
Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 29.1 (#308), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: 38.7 (#169)
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5 4b Chat | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 45% |
| LMArena Coding | 999 | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 52.3% |
Reasoning Too close to call
Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 18.5 (#279), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: 19.2 (#266)
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5 4b Chat | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Chess Puzzles | — | 0% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 976 | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 128.52 |
Math Qwen1.5 4b Chat leads
Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 30.4 (#234), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: 16.2 (#296)
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5 4b Chat | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 7.4% |
| LMArena Math | 1026 | — |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 56.1% |
Knowledge Qwen1.5 4b Chat leads
Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 26.7 (#255), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: 24.9 (#266)
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5 4b Chat | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 46.1% |
| LMArena Expert | 980 | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 24.1 (#290), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5 4b Chat | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 979 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1024 | — |
| LMArena German | 902 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 952 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 49.0 (#300), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5 4b Chat | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 978 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 30.1 (#290), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5 4b Chat | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 988 | — |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 23.8 (#309), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5 4b Chat | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 997 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 969 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 977 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Qwen1.5 4b Chat better than Qwen2.5 32B Instruct?
Qwen2.5 32B Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 30.1 to 28.8 on the Noometry Index.
Is Qwen1.5 4b Chat or Qwen2.5 32B Instruct better for coding?
Qwen2.5 32B Instruct scores higher on coding benchmarks: 38.7 versus 29.1 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Qwen1.5 4b Chat and Qwen2.5 32B Instruct share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Qwen1.5 4b Chat has 13 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5 32B Instruct has 7.