Model comparison
Qwen2.5-Coder-32B vs Qwen3 8B
Qwen2.5-Coder-32B and Qwen3 8B score almost the same on the Noometry Index (33.4 vs 33.7), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Last verified . 1 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 1 benchmark with published results for both. Qwen2.5-Coder-32B scores higher in 2 categories and Qwen3 8B in 3 categories; 4 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in coding, where Qwen3 8B leads 34.0 to 22.6.
- Qwen3 8B is cheaper at $0.18 / $0.70 per million input/output tokens, against $0.66 / $1 for Qwen2.5-Coder-32B.
- Qwen3 8B accepts more context: 131K tokens versus 33K.
Side by side
| Qwen2.5-Coder-32B | Qwen3 8B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 33.4 | 33.7 |
| Released | 2024-09-18 | 2025-04 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 33K | 131K |
| Max output | 29K | 8K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.66 | $0.18 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $1 | $0.70 |
| Results tracked | 31 | 11 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Qwen3 8B leads
Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 22.6 (#333), Qwen3 8B: 34.0 (#248)
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B | Qwen3 8B |
|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 9% | — |
| Aider Polyglot | 16.4% | — |
| SciCode | — | 22.6% |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 49% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 56.9% | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1276 | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 58% | — |
| HumanEval+ | 87.2% | — |
| MBPP+ | 77% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: —, Qwen3 8B: 30.2 (#78)
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B | Qwen3 8B |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 42.6% |
Reasoning Qwen2.5-Coder-32B leads
Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 21.2 (#225), Qwen3 8B: 16.6 (#303)
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B | Qwen3 8B |
|---|---|---|
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 119.49 | 136.17 |
| CritPt | — | 0% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 5% |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 42.1% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1251 | — |
| DTBench | — | 59.7% |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 49.9% | — |
| LMCA | — | 8.8% |
| HellaSwag | 83% | — |
| LiveBench | 46.2% | — |
| WinoGrande | 80.8% | — |
Math Qwen3 8B leads
Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 33.3 (#204), Qwen3 8B: 34.9 (#191)
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B | Qwen3 8B |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 56.1% |
| LiveBench Math | 46.6% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1251 | — |
| GSM8K | 93% | — |
Knowledge Qwen3 8B leads
Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 33.4 (#203), Qwen3 8B: 36.1 (#173)
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B | Qwen3 8B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 56.8% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 4.8% |
| LMArena Expert | 1221 | — |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | 70.5% | — |
| MMLU | 79.1% | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 37.8 (#235), Qwen3 8B: —
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B | Qwen3 8B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1205 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1222 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1228 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 61.4 (#245), Qwen3 8B: —
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B | Qwen3 8B |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 58.7% | — |
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1223 | — |
Long Context Too close to call
Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 38.0 (#208), Qwen3 8B: 37.9 (#210)
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B | Qwen3 8B |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 62.1% |
| LMArena Longer Query | 1251 | — |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 41.6 (#240), Qwen3 8B: —
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B | Qwen3 8B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1230 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1174 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1222 | — |
| LiveBench Language | 23.3% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Qwen2.5-Coder-32B better than Qwen3 8B?
Qwen2.5-Coder-32B and Qwen3 8B score almost the same on the Noometry Index (33.4 vs 33.7), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Which is cheaper, Qwen2.5-Coder-32B or Qwen3 8B?
Qwen3 8B is cheaper. It lists at $0.18 per million input tokens and $0.70 per million output tokens; Qwen2.5-Coder-32B lists at $0.66 and $1.
Is Qwen2.5-Coder-32B or Qwen3 8B better for coding?
Qwen3 8B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 34.0 versus 22.6 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Qwen3 8B does, with 131K tokens against 33K.
How many benchmarks do Qwen2.5-Coder-32B and Qwen3 8B share?
1 benchmark has published results for both models. Qwen2.5-Coder-32B has 31 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3 8B has 11.