Model comparison

Qwen2.5-Coder-32B vs Step 2 16k Exp 202412

Step 2 16k Exp 202412 is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.2 to 33.4 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 12 shared benchmarks.

Qwen2.5-Coder-32B Alibaba (Qwen)

33.4

Rank #245 Confirmed

Step 2 16k Exp 202412 StepFun

39.2

Rank #171 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. Qwen2.5-Coder-32B scores higher in 0 categories and Step 2 16k Exp 202412 in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in coding, where Step 2 16k Exp 202412 leads 38.5 to 22.6.
  • Qwen2.5-Coder-32B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Qwen2.5-Coder-32B and Step 2 16k Exp 202412 specifications
Qwen2.5-Coder-32BStep 2 16k Exp 202412
ProviderAlibaba (Qwen)StepFun
Noometry Index33.439.2
Released2024-09-18—
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window33K—
Max output29K—
Input $ / M tokens$0.66—
Output $ / M tokens$1—
Results tracked3112

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

Category by category

Coding Step 2 16k Exp 202412 leads

Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 22.6 (#333), Step 2 16k Exp 202412: 38.5 (#174)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen2.5-Coder-32BStep 2 16k Exp 202412
LMArena Coding12761316
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)9%—
Aider Polyglot16.4%—
BigCodeBench Instruct49%—
LiveBench Coding56.9%—
BigCodeBench Complete58%—
HumanEval+87.2%—
MBPP+77%—

Reasoning Step 2 16k Exp 202412 leads

Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 21.2 (#225), Step 2 16k Exp 202412: 25.9 (#142)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen2.5-Coder-32BStep 2 16k Exp 202412
LMArena Hard Prompts12511299
LiveBench Reasoning42.1%—
LiveBench Data Analysis49.9%—
Epoch Capabilities Index119.49—
HellaSwag83%—
LiveBench46.2%—
WinoGrande80.8%—

Math Step 2 16k Exp 202412 leads

Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 33.3 (#204), Step 2 16k Exp 202412: 36.3 (#169)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen2.5-Coder-32BStep 2 16k Exp 202412
LMArena Math12511304
LiveBench Math46.6%—
GSM8K93%—

Knowledge Step 2 16k Exp 202412 leads

Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 33.4 (#203), Step 2 16k Exp 202412: 35.2 (#187)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen2.5-Coder-32BStep 2 16k Exp 202412
LMArena Expert12211279
ARC (AI2) Challenge70.5%—
MMLU79.1%—

Multilingual Step 2 16k Exp 202412 leads

Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 37.8 (#235), Step 2 16k Exp 202412: 43.7 (#181)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen2.5-Coder-32BStep 2 16k Exp 202412
LMArena Non-English12051290
LMArena Chinese12221331
LMArena Russian12281324

Instruction Following Step 2 16k Exp 202412 leads

Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 61.4 (#245), Step 2 16k Exp 202412: 67.9 (#192)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen2.5-Coder-32BStep 2 16k Exp 202412
LMArena Instruction Following12231287
LiveBench Instruction Following58.7%—

Long Context Step 2 16k Exp 202412 leads

Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 38.0 (#208), Step 2 16k Exp 202412: 39.7 (#170)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen2.5-Coder-32BStep 2 16k Exp 202412
LMArena Longer Query12511307

Writing & Preference Step 2 16k Exp 202412 leads

Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 41.6 (#240), Step 2 16k Exp 202412: 52.3 (#173)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen2.5-Coder-32BStep 2 16k Exp 202412
LMArena Text12301321
LMArena Creative Writing11741328
LMArena Multi-Turn12221292
LiveBench Language23.3%—

Frequently asked questions

Is Qwen2.5-Coder-32B better than Step 2 16k Exp 202412?

Step 2 16k Exp 202412 is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.2 to 33.4 on the Noometry Index.

Is Qwen2.5-Coder-32B or Step 2 16k Exp 202412 better for coding?

Step 2 16k Exp 202412 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 38.5 versus 22.6 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Qwen2.5-Coder-32B and Step 2 16k Exp 202412 share?

12 benchmarks have published results for both models. Qwen2.5-Coder-32B has 31 scored results on Noometry and Step 2 16k Exp 202412 has 12.

Related comparisons

Go deeper