# GPT-5.1-Codex vs Qwen2.5-Coder-32B

> GPT-5.1-Codex is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.6 to 33.4 on the Noometry Index. Qwen2.5-Coder-32B costs 4.6× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GPT-5.1-Codex's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/gpt-5-1-codex-vs-qwen2-5-coder-32b
- Last updated: 2026-10-11
- Shared benchmarks: 1

## Summary

- They share 1 benchmark with published results for both. GPT-5.1-Codex scores higher in 1 category and Qwen2.5-Coder-32B in 1 category; 2 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in coding, where GPT-5.1-Codex leads 41.9 to 22.6.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is SWE-bench Verified (bash only): 66% for GPT-5.1-Codex and 9% for Qwen2.5-Coder-32B.
- Qwen2.5-Coder-32B is cheaper at $0.66 / $1 per million input/output tokens, against $1.25 / $10 for GPT-5.1-Codex.
- GPT-5.1-Codex accepts more context: 400K tokens versus 33K.
- Qwen2.5-Coder-32B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | GPT-5.1-Codex | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenAI | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 38.6 | 33.4 |
| Rank | 186 | 245 |
| Context | 400K | 33K |
| Input $/M | $1.25 | $0.66 |
| Output $/M | $10 | $1 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |

## Coding

- GPT-5.1-Codex: 41.9 (#116)
- Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 22.6 (#333)

| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 66% | 9% |
| Aider Polyglot | — | 16.4% |
| LMArena WebDev | 1337 | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 49% |
| LiveBench Coding | — | 56.9% |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1276 |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 58% |
| ALE-Bench | 1,245 | — |
| HumanEval+ | — | 87.2% |
| MBPP+ | — | 77% |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- GPT-5.1-Codex: 38.0 (#33)
- Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: —

| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | 60.4% | — |
| METR Time Horizons | 70.8% | — |

## Reasoning

- GPT-5.1-Codex: —
- Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 21.2 (#225)

| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Reasoning | — | 42.1% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1251 |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | — | 49.9% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 119.49 |
| HellaSwag | — | 83% |
| LiveBench | — | 46.2% |
| WinoGrande | — | 80.8% |

## Math

- GPT-5.1-Codex: 30.3 (#235)
- Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 33.3 (#204)

| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| ProofBench | 9% | — |
| LiveBench Math | — | 46.6% |
| LMArena Math | — | 1251 |
| GSM8K | — | 93% |

## Knowledge

- GPT-5.1-Codex: —
- Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 33.4 (#203)

| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | — | 1221 |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | — | 70.5% |
| MMLU | — | 79.1% |

## Multilingual

- GPT-5.1-Codex: —
- Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 37.8 (#235)

| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1205 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1222 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1228 |

## Instruction Following

- GPT-5.1-Codex: —
- Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 61.4 (#245)

| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Instruction Following | — | 58.7% |
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1223 |

## Long Context

- GPT-5.1-Codex: —
- Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 38.0 (#208)

| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1251 |

## Writing & Preference

- GPT-5.1-Codex: —
- Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 41.6 (#240)

| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1230 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1174 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1222 |
| LiveBench Language | — | 23.3% |

## FAQ

### Is GPT-5.1-Codex better than Qwen2.5-Coder-32B?

GPT-5.1-Codex is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.6 to 33.4 on the Noometry Index. Qwen2.5-Coder-32B costs 4.6× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GPT-5.1-Codex's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

### Which is cheaper, GPT-5.1-Codex or Qwen2.5-Coder-32B?

Qwen2.5-Coder-32B is cheaper. It lists at $0.66 per million input tokens and $1 per million output tokens; GPT-5.1-Codex lists at $1.25 and $10.

### Is GPT-5.1-Codex or Qwen2.5-Coder-32B better for coding?

GPT-5.1-Codex scores higher on coding benchmarks: 41.9 versus 22.6 in the Noometry coding category.

### Which has the bigger context window?

GPT-5.1-Codex does, with 400K tokens against 33K.

### How many benchmarks do GPT-5.1-Codex and Qwen2.5-Coder-32B share?

1 benchmark has published results for both models. GPT-5.1-Codex has 6 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5-Coder-32B has 31.