Model comparison

Qwen2.5 32B Instruct vs Step 3.7 Flash

Step 3.7 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 37.3 to 30.1 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.

Qwen2.5 32B Instruct Alibaba (Qwen)

30.1

Rank #297 Confirmed

Step 3.7 Flash StepFun

37.3

Rank #207 Reported

Summary

  • The widest gap is in math, where Step 3.7 Flash leads 42.9 to 16.2.
  • Step 3.7 Flash is cheaper at $0.18 / $1.11 per million input/output tokens, against $0.70 / $2.80 for Qwen2.5 32B Instruct.
  • Step 3.7 Flash accepts more context: 256K tokens versus 131K.

Side by side

Qwen2.5 32B Instruct and Step 3.7 Flash specifications
Qwen2.5 32B InstructStep 3.7 Flash
ProviderAlibaba (Qwen)StepFun
Noometry Index30.137.3
Released2024-092026-05-29
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window131K256K
Max output8K256K
Input $ / M tokens$0.70$0.18
Output $ / M tokens$2.80$1.11
Results tracked75

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

Category by category

Coding Step 3.7 Flash leads

Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: 38.7 (#169), Step 3.7 Flash: 40.0 (#150)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen2.5 32B InstructStep 3.7 Flash
SciCode—40%
BigCodeBench Instruct45%—
BigCodeBench Complete52.3%—
ALE-Bench—694.12

Reasoning Step 3.7 Flash leads

Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: 19.2 (#266), Step 3.7 Flash: 21.6 (#219)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen2.5 32B InstructStep 3.7 Flash
NYT Connections (extended)—39.7%
CritPt—2.3%
Chess Puzzles0%—
Epoch Capabilities Index128.52—

Math Step 3.7 Flash leads

Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: 16.2 (#296), Step 3.7 Flash: 42.9 (#82)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen2.5 32B InstructStep 3.7 Flash
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions—68.5%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-20257.4%—
MATH Level 556.1%—

Knowledge Not comparable

Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: 24.9 (#266), Step 3.7 Flash: —

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen2.5 32B InstructStep 3.7 Flash
GPQA Diamond46.1%—

Frequently asked questions

Is Qwen2.5 32B Instruct better than Step 3.7 Flash?

Step 3.7 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 37.3 to 30.1 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, Qwen2.5 32B Instruct or Step 3.7 Flash?

Step 3.7 Flash is cheaper. It lists at $0.18 per million input tokens and $1.11 per million output tokens; Qwen2.5 32B Instruct lists at $0.70 and $2.80.

Is Qwen2.5 32B Instruct or Step 3.7 Flash better for coding?

Step 3.7 Flash scores higher on coding benchmarks: 40.0 versus 38.7 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Step 3.7 Flash does, with 256K tokens against 131K.

How many benchmarks do Qwen2.5 32B Instruct and Step 3.7 Flash share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Qwen2.5 32B Instruct has 7 scored results on Noometry and Step 3.7 Flash has 5.

Related comparisons

Go deeper