# Codestral vs Qwen1.5-32B

> Codestral and Qwen1.5-32B score almost the same on the Noometry Index (30.6 vs 30.5), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/codestral-vs-qwen1-5-32b
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 2

## Summary

- They share 2 benchmarks with published results for both. Codestral scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen1.5-32B in 2 categories; 2 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in coding, where Qwen1.5-32B leads 31.7 to 27.3.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is BigCodeBench Complete: 52.5% for Codestral and 42% for Qwen1.5-32B.
- Qwen1.5-32B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | Codestral | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Mistral AI | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 30.6 | 30.5 |
| Rank | 290 | 293 |
| Context | 256K | — |
| Input $/M | $0.30 | — |
| Output $/M | $0.90 | — |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |

## Coding

- Codestral: 27.3 (#321)
- Qwen1.5-32B: 31.7 (#282)

| Benchmark | Codestral | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 41.8% | 32.3% |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 52.5% | 42% |
| Aider Polyglot | 11.1% | — |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1155 |
| ALE-Bench | 137.78 | — |
| HumanEval+ | 73.8% | — |
| MBPP+ | 61.9% | — |

## Reasoning

- Codestral: 19.8 (#251)
- Qwen1.5-32B: 21.8 (#212)

| Benchmark | Codestral | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 32.5% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1130 |

## Math

- Codestral: —
- Qwen1.5-32B: 33.0 (#207)

| Benchmark | Codestral | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | — | 1155 |

## Knowledge

- Codestral: —
- Qwen1.5-32B: 13.5 (#296)

| Benchmark | Codestral | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 30.7% |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1126 |
| MMLU | — | 74.4% |

## Multilingual

- Codestral: —
- Qwen1.5-32B: 31.4 (#259)

| Benchmark | Codestral | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1106 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1177 |
| LMArena French | — | 1101 |
| LMArena German | — | 1058 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1027 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1008 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1073 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1089 |

## Instruction Following

- Codestral: —
- Qwen1.5-32B: 57.7 (#265)

| Benchmark | Codestral | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1116 |

## Long Context

- Codestral: —
- Qwen1.5-32B: 34.7 (#246)

| Benchmark | Codestral | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1146 |

## Writing & Preference

- Codestral: —
- Qwen1.5-32B: 34.2 (#271)

| Benchmark | Codestral | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1137 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1083 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1140 |

## FAQ

### Is Codestral better than Qwen1.5-32B?

Codestral and Qwen1.5-32B score almost the same on the Noometry Index (30.6 vs 30.5), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.

### Is Codestral or Qwen1.5-32B better for coding?

Qwen1.5-32B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 31.7 versus 27.3 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do Codestral and Qwen1.5-32B share?

2 benchmarks have published results for both models. Codestral has 7 scored results on Noometry and Qwen1.5-32B has 21.