# GPT-5.4 Pro vs Qwen2.5-Coder-32B

> GPT-5.4 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 58.8 to 32.9 on the Noometry Index. Qwen2.5-Coder-32B costs 91× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GPT-5.4 Pro's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/gpt-5-4-pro-vs-qwen2-5-coder-32b
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 1

## Summary

- They share 1 benchmark with published results for both. GPT-5.4 Pro scores higher in 4 categories and Qwen2.5-Coder-32B in 0 categories; 4 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where GPT-5.4 Pro leads 71.0 to 20.4.
- Qwen2.5-Coder-32B is cheaper at $0.66 / $1 per million input/output tokens, against $30 / $180 for GPT-5.4 Pro.
- GPT-5.4 Pro accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 33K.
- Qwen2.5-Coder-32B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | GPT-5.4 Pro | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenAI | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 58.8 | 32.9 |
| Rank | 16 | 239 |
| Context | 1.05M | 33K |
| Input $/M | $30 | $0.66 |
| Output $/M | $180 | $1 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |

## Coding

- GPT-5.4 Pro: 42.6 (#89)
- Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 22.4 (#328)

| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 Pro | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | — | 9% |
| Aider Polyglot | — | 16.4% |
| WeirdML | 57.4% | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 49% |
| LiveBench Coding | — | 56.9% |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1276 |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 58% |
| HumanEval+ | — | 87.2% |
| MBPP+ | — | 77% |

## Reasoning

- GPT-5.4 Pro: 71.0 (#10)
- Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 20.4 (#220)

| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 Pro | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 159.12 | 119.41 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 83.3% | — |
| SimpleBench | 74.1% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 94.5% | — |
| CritPt | 30% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 58.6% | — |
| EnigmaEval | 23.8% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | — | 42.1% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1251 |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | — | 49.9% |
| HellaSwag | — | 83% |
| LiveBench | — | 46.2% |
| WinoGrande | — | 80.8% |

## Math

- GPT-5.4 Pro: 72.0 (#17)
- Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 30.8 (#203)

| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 Pro | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 82.5% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 58.5% | — |
| LiveBench Math | — | 46.6% |
| LMArena Math | — | 1251 |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 50% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 37.5% | — |
| GSM8K | — | 93% |

## Knowledge

- GPT-5.4 Pro: 68.3 (#6)
- Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 32.9 (#200)

| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 Pro | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 94.6% | — |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 44.3% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | 46.3% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 8.3% | — |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1221 |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | — | 70.5% |
| MMLU | — | 79.1% |

## Multilingual

- GPT-5.4 Pro: —
- Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 38.0 (#230)

| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 Pro | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1205 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1222 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1228 |

## Instruction Following

- GPT-5.4 Pro: —
- Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 61.6 (#240)

| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 Pro | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Instruction Following | — | 58.7% |
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1223 |

## Long Context

- GPT-5.4 Pro: —
- Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 37.9 (#204)

| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 Pro | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1251 |

## Writing & Preference

- GPT-5.4 Pro: —
- Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 41.8 (#235)

| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 Pro | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1230 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1174 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1222 |
| LiveBench Language | — | 23.3% |

## FAQ

### Is GPT-5.4 Pro better than Qwen2.5-Coder-32B?

GPT-5.4 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 58.8 to 32.9 on the Noometry Index. Qwen2.5-Coder-32B costs 91× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GPT-5.4 Pro's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

### Which is cheaper, GPT-5.4 Pro 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-5.4 Pro lists at $30 and $180.

### Is GPT-5.4 Pro or Qwen2.5-Coder-32B better for coding?

GPT-5.4 Pro scores higher on coding benchmarks: 42.6 versus 22.4 in the Noometry coding category.

### Which has the bigger context window?

GPT-5.4 Pro does, with 1.05M tokens against 33K.

### How many benchmarks do GPT-5.4 Pro and Qwen2.5-Coder-32B share?

1 benchmark has published results for both models. GPT-5.4 Pro has 16 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5-Coder-32B has 31.