# Magistral Small vs Qwen2.5 7B Instruct

> Magistral Small is the stronger model overall, scoring 30.2 to 29.0 on the Noometry Index. Qwen2.5 7B Instruct costs 2.4× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Magistral Small's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/magistral-small-vs-qwen2-5-7b-instruct
- Last updated: 2026-10-12
- Shared benchmarks: 5

## Summary

- They share 5 benchmarks with published results for both. Magistral Small scores higher in 3 categories and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct in 1 category; 4 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Magistral Small leads 30.9 to 17.0.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 30% for Magistral Small and 2.5% for Qwen2.5 7B Instruct.
- Qwen2.5 7B Instruct is cheaper at $0.17 / $0.70 per million input/output tokens, against $0.50 / $1.50 for Magistral Small.
- Qwen2.5 7B Instruct accepts more context: 131K tokens versus 128K.

## Snapshot

| | Magistral Small | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Mistral AI | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 30.2 | 29.0 |
| Rank | 296 | 320 |
| Context | 128K | 131K |
| Input $/M | $0.50 | $0.17 |
| Output $/M | $1.50 | $0.70 |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- Magistral Small: 38.4 (#176)
- Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 36.5 (#208)

| Benchmark | Magistral Small | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | 35.2% | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 37.6% |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 46.1% |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Magistral Small: —
- Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 23.8 (#124)

| Benchmark | Magistral Small | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| BALROG | — | 7.8% |

## Reasoning

- Magistral Small: 6.8 (#350)
- Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 14.8 (#322)

| Benchmark | Magistral Small | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Chess Puzzles | 3% | 0% |
| DTBench | 61.3% | 47.7% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 133.19 | 118.51 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 0% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 6.3% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 5% | — |
| CritPt | 0.3% | — |
| LMCA | — | 6.4% |

## Math

- Magistral Small: 26.2 (#261)
- Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 12.6 (#306)

| Benchmark | Magistral Small | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 30% | 2.5% |
| Omni-MATH | — | 29.4% |

## Knowledge

- Magistral Small: 30.9 (#223)
- Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 17.0 (#286)

| Benchmark | Magistral Small | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 56.1% | 35.5% |
| MMLU-Pro | — | 53.9% |
| GPQA (HELM) | — | 34.1% |
| MMLU | — | 72.9% |

## Instruction Following

- Magistral Small: —
- Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 63.2 (#231)

| Benchmark | Magistral Small | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| IFEval | — | 74.1% |

## Writing & Preference

- Magistral Small: —
- Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 48.8 (#195)

| Benchmark | Magistral Small | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| WildBench | — | 73.1% |

## FAQ

### Is Magistral Small better than Qwen2.5 7B Instruct?

Magistral Small is the stronger model overall, scoring 30.2 to 29.0 on the Noometry Index. Qwen2.5 7B Instruct costs 2.4× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Magistral Small's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

### Which is cheaper, Magistral Small or Qwen2.5 7B Instruct?

Qwen2.5 7B Instruct is cheaper. It lists at $0.17 per million input tokens and $0.70 per million output tokens; Magistral Small lists at $0.50 and $1.50.

### Is Magistral Small or Qwen2.5 7B Instruct better for coding?

Magistral Small scores higher on coding benchmarks: 38.4 versus 36.5 in the Noometry coding category.

### Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen2.5 7B Instruct does, with 131K tokens against 128K.

### How many benchmarks do Magistral Small and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct share?

5 benchmarks have published results for both models. Magistral Small has 10 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct has 15.