# DeepSeek LLM 67B vs Qwen2.5 32B Instruct

> Qwen2.5 32B Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 30.1 to 24.9 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/deepseek-llm-67b-vs-qwen2-5-32b-instruct
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 5

## Summary

- They share 5 benchmarks with published results for both. DeepSeek LLM 67B scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen2.5 32B Instruct in 4 categories; 4 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen2.5 32B Instruct leads 24.9 to 7.0.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is MATH Level 5: 6.4% for DeepSeek LLM 67B and 56.1% for Qwen2.5 32B Instruct.

## Snapshot

| | DeepSeek LLM 67B | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | DeepSeek | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 24.9 | 30.1 |
| Rank | 347 | 297 |
| Context | — | 131K |
| Input $/M | — | $0.70 |
| Output $/M | — | $2.80 |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- DeepSeek LLM 67B: 31.9 (#278)
- Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: 38.7 (#169)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek LLM 67B | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 45% |
| LMArena Coding | 1096 | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 52.3% |

## Reasoning

- DeepSeek LLM 67B: 16.5 (#304)
- Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: 19.2 (#266)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek LLM 67B | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Chess Puzzles | 0% | 0% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 110.5 | 128.52 |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1070 | — |

## Math

- DeepSeek LLM 67B: 8.7 (#324)
- Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: 16.2 (#296)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek LLM 67B | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 0.8% | 7.4% |
| MATH Level 5 | 6.4% | 56.1% |
| LMArena Math | 1108 | — |

## Knowledge

- DeepSeek LLM 67B: 7.0 (#313)
- Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: 24.9 (#266)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek LLM 67B | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 24.6% | 46.1% |

## Multilingual

- DeepSeek LLM 67B: 29.4 (#267)
- Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: —

| Benchmark | DeepSeek LLM 67B | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1073 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1132 | — |

## Instruction Following

- DeepSeek LLM 67B: 55.4 (#277)
- Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: —

| Benchmark | DeepSeek LLM 67B | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1079 | — |

## Long Context

- DeepSeek LLM 67B: 33.1 (#265)
- Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: —

| Benchmark | DeepSeek LLM 67B | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1092 | — |

## Writing & Preference

- DeepSeek LLM 67B: 31.6 (#282)
- Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: —

| Benchmark | DeepSeek LLM 67B | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1105 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1067 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1082 | — |

## FAQ

### Is DeepSeek LLM 67B better than Qwen2.5 32B Instruct?

Qwen2.5 32B Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 30.1 to 24.9 on the Noometry Index.

### Is DeepSeek LLM 67B or Qwen2.5 32B Instruct better for coding?

Qwen2.5 32B Instruct scores higher on coding benchmarks: 38.7 versus 31.9 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do DeepSeek LLM 67B and Qwen2.5 32B Instruct share?

5 benchmarks have published results for both models. DeepSeek LLM 67B has 15 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5 32B Instruct has 7.