Model comparison
Qwen2.5 32B Instruct vs Solar Pro4
Solar Pro4 is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.1 to 30.1 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)
UpstageSummary
- The widest gap is in math, where Solar Pro4 leads 38.8 to 16.2.
- Solar Pro4 is cheaper at $0.30 / $1.20 per million input/output tokens, against $0.70 / $2.80 for Qwen2.5 32B Instruct.
- Solar Pro4 accepts more context: 524K tokens versus 131K.
- Qwen2.5 32B Instruct has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Qwen2.5 32B Instruct | Solar Pro4 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | Upstage |
| Noometry Index | 30.1 | 42.1 |
| Released | 2024-09 | 2026-08-06 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | 131K | 524K |
| Max output | 8K | 131K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.70 | $0.30 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $2.80 | $1.20 |
| Results tracked | 7 | 18 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Solar Pro4 leads
Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: 38.7 (#169), Solar Pro4: 40.1 (#149)
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct | Solar Pro4 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1371 |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 45% | — |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1437 |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 52.3% | — |
Reasoning Solar Pro4 leads
Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: 19.2 (#266), Solar Pro4: 28.5 (#104)
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct | Solar Pro4 |
|---|---|---|
| Chess Puzzles | 0% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1399 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 128.52 | — |
Math Solar Pro4 leads
Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: 16.2 (#296), Solar Pro4: 38.8 (#128)
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct | Solar Pro4 |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 7.4% | — |
| LMArena Math | — | 1416 |
| MATH Level 5 | 56.1% | — |
Knowledge Solar Pro4 leads
Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: 24.9 (#266), Solar Pro4: 39.8 (#129)
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct | Solar Pro4 |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 46.1% | — |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1427 |
Multilingual Not comparable
Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: —, Solar Pro4: 48.7 (#139)
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct | Solar Pro4 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1361 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1415 |
| LMArena French | — | 1397 |
| LMArena German | — | 1364 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1309 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1382 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1360 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1401 |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: —, Solar Pro4: 72.7 (#132)
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct | Solar Pro4 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1377 |
Long Context Not comparable
Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: —, Solar Pro4: 42.1 (#130)
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct | Solar Pro4 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1381 |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: —, Solar Pro4: 56.5 (#138)
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct | Solar Pro4 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1386 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1316 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1385 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Qwen2.5 32B Instruct better than Solar Pro4?
Solar Pro4 is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.1 to 30.1 on the Noometry Index.
Which is cheaper, Qwen2.5 32B Instruct or Solar Pro4?
Solar Pro4 is cheaper. It lists at $0.30 per million input tokens and $1.20 per million output tokens; Qwen2.5 32B Instruct lists at $0.70 and $2.80.
Is Qwen2.5 32B Instruct or Solar Pro4 better for coding?
Solar Pro4 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 40.1 versus 38.7 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Solar Pro4 does, with 524K tokens against 131K.
How many benchmarks do Qwen2.5 32B Instruct and Solar Pro4 share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Qwen2.5 32B Instruct has 7 scored results on Noometry and Solar Pro4 has 18.