# DBRX vs Qwen2.5 32B Instruct

> DBRX and Qwen2.5 32B Instruct score almost the same on the Noometry Index (29.4 vs 30.1), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/dbrx-vs-qwen2-5-32b-instruct
- Last updated: 2026-10-11
- Shared benchmarks: 2

## Summary

- They share 2 benchmarks with published results for both. DBRX scores higher in 2 categories and Qwen2.5 32B Instruct in 2 categories; 4 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen2.5 32B Instruct leads 24.9 to 14.9.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is MATH Level 5: 11.7% for DBRX and 56.1% for Qwen2.5 32B Instruct.

## Snapshot

| | DBRX | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Databricks | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 29.4 | 30.1 |
| Rank | 311 | 297 |
| Context | — | 131K |
| Input $/M | — | $0.70 |
| Output $/M | — | $2.80 |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- DBRX: 32.9 (#266)
- Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: 38.7 (#169)

| Benchmark | DBRX | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 45% |
| LMArena Coding | 1132 | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 52.3% |
| HumanEval+ | 70.1% | — |
| MBPP+ | 55.8% | — |

## Reasoning

- DBRX: 21.4 (#222)
- Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: 19.2 (#266)

| Benchmark | DBRX | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Chess Puzzles | — | 0% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1113 | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 128.52 |

## Math

- DBRX: 24.3 (#269)
- Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: 16.2 (#296)

| Benchmark | DBRX | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| MATH Level 5 | 11.7% | 56.1% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 7.4% |
| LMArena Math | 1145 | — |

## Knowledge

- DBRX: 14.9 (#294)
- Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: 24.9 (#266)

| Benchmark | DBRX | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 32.9% | 46.1% |
| LMArena Expert | 1076 | — |

## Multilingual

- DBRX: 29.3 (#268)
- Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: —

| Benchmark | DBRX | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1071 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1068 | — |
| LMArena French | 1096 | — |
| LMArena German | 1057 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 990 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 993 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1078 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1064 | — |

## Instruction Following

- DBRX: 57.5 (#270)
- Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: —

| Benchmark | DBRX | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1112 | — |

## Long Context

- DBRX: 33.7 (#258)
- Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: —

| Benchmark | DBRX | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1112 | — |

## Writing & Preference

- DBRX: 33.6 (#275)
- Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: —

| Benchmark | DBRX | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1119 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1104 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1111 | — |

## FAQ

### Is DBRX better than Qwen2.5 32B Instruct?

DBRX and Qwen2.5 32B Instruct score almost the same on the Noometry Index (29.4 vs 30.1), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.

### Is DBRX or Qwen2.5 32B Instruct better for coding?

Qwen2.5 32B Instruct scores higher on coding benchmarks: 38.7 versus 32.9 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do DBRX and Qwen2.5 32B Instruct share?

2 benchmarks have published results for both models. DBRX has 21 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5 32B Instruct has 7.