Model comparison
Qwen2.5 32B Instruct vs Qwen3.6 Plus
Qwen3.6 Plus is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.5 to 30.1 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 4 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 4 benchmarks with published results for both. Qwen2.5 32B Instruct scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3.6 Plus in 4 categories; 4 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Qwen3.6 Plus leads 51.8 to 16.2.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 7.4% for Qwen2.5 32B Instruct and 93.3% for Qwen3.6 Plus.
- Qwen3.6 Plus is cheaper at $0.50 / $3 per million input/output tokens, against $0.70 / $2.80 for Qwen2.5 32B Instruct.
- Qwen3.6 Plus accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 131K.
- Qwen2.5 32B Instruct has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Qwen2.5 32B Instruct | Qwen3.6 Plus | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 30.1 | 47.5 |
| Released | 2024-09 | 2026-03-31 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | 131K | 1M |
| Max output | 8K | 66K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.70 | $0.50 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $2.80 | $3 |
| Results tracked | 7 | 37 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Qwen3.6 Plus leads
Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: 38.7 (#169), Qwen3.6 Plus: 40.8 (#130)
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct | Qwen3.6 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench Verified | — | 57.9% |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1461 |
| SciCode | — | 40.7% |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 45% | — |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1467 |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 52.3% | — |
| ALE-Bench | — | 670.15 |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: —, Qwen3.6 Plus: —
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct | Qwen3.6 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| Vending-Bench 2 | — | 5,115 |
Reasoning Qwen3.6 Plus leads
Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: 19.2 (#266), Qwen3.6 Plus: 29.3 (#93)
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct | Qwen3.6 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| Chess Puzzles | 0% | 17% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 128.52 | 147.65 |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 60.3% |
| CritPt | — | 2.9% |
| Thematic Generalization | — | 59.5% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1449 |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 12% |
| DTBench | — | 81.9% |
| LMCA | — | 33.1% |
Math Qwen3.6 Plus leads
Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: 16.2 (#296), Qwen3.6 Plus: 51.8 (#54)
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct | Qwen3.6 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 7.4% | 93.3% |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 38.2% |
| LMArena Math | — | 1450 |
| MATH Level 5 | 56.1% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 26.2% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | — | 8.3% |
Knowledge Qwen3.6 Plus leads
Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: 24.9 (#266), Qwen3.6 Plus: 56.1 (#45)
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct | Qwen3.6 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 46.1% | 88.4% |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 44.1% |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1454 |
Multilingual Not comparable
Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: —, Qwen3.6 Plus: 53.3 (#70)
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct | Qwen3.6 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1424 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1477 |
| LMArena French | — | 1455 |
| LMArena German | — | 1452 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1389 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1379 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1434 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1432 |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: —, Qwen3.6 Plus: 75.0 (#74)
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct | Qwen3.6 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1425 |
Long Context Not comparable
Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: —, Qwen3.6 Plus: 45.2 (#49)
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct | Qwen3.6 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| CL-bench | — | 20.3% |
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1439 |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: —, Qwen3.6 Plus: 62.2 (#82)
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct | Qwen3.6 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1437 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1404 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1438 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Qwen2.5 32B Instruct better than Qwen3.6 Plus?
Qwen3.6 Plus is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.5 to 30.1 on the Noometry Index.
Which is cheaper, Qwen2.5 32B Instruct or Qwen3.6 Plus?
Qwen3.6 Plus is cheaper. It lists at $0.50 per million input tokens and $3 per million output tokens; Qwen2.5 32B Instruct lists at $0.70 and $2.80.
Is Qwen2.5 32B Instruct or Qwen3.6 Plus better for coding?
Qwen3.6 Plus scores higher on coding benchmarks: 40.8 versus 38.7 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Qwen3.6 Plus does, with 1M tokens against 131K.
How many benchmarks do Qwen2.5 32B Instruct and Qwen3.6 Plus share?
4 benchmarks have published results for both models. Qwen2.5 32B Instruct has 7 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.6 Plus has 37.