# o1-mini vs Qwen2.5 32B Instruct

> o1-mini is the stronger model overall, scoring 33.7 to 29.7 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/o1-mini-vs-qwen2-5-32b-instruct
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 4

## Summary

- They share 4 benchmarks with published results for both. o1-mini 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 math, where o1-mini leads 33.7 to 15.3.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 46.9% for o1-mini and 7.4% for Qwen2.5 32B Instruct.
- Qwen2.5 32B Instruct has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | o1-mini | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenAI | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 33.7 | 29.7 |
| Rank | 230 | 291 |
| Context | — | 131K |
| Input $/M | — | $0.70 |
| Output $/M | — | $2.80 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |

## Coding

- o1-mini: 35.1 (#218)
- Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: 38.1 (#165)

| Benchmark | o1-mini | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Aider Polyglot | 32.9% | — |
| WeirdML | 36.3% | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 45% |
| LiveBench Coding | 48% | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1362 | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 52.3% |
| HumanEval+ | 89% | — |
| MBPP+ | 78.8% | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- o1-mini: 24.3 (#112)
- Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: —

| Benchmark | o1-mini | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Cybench | 10% | — |

## Reasoning

- o1-mini: 8.9 (#340)
- Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: 18.5 (#262)

| Benchmark | o1-mini | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 135.82 | 128.52 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 0.8% | — |
| SimpleBench | 18.1% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 14% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 0% |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 72.3% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1333 | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 57.9% | — |
| LiveBench | 57.8% | — |

## Math

- o1-mini: 33.7 (#168)
- Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: 15.3 (#289)

| Benchmark | o1-mini | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 46.9% | 7.4% |
| MATH Level 5 | 89.2% | 56.1% |
| LiveBench Math | 62% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1358 | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 1.7% | — |

## Knowledge

- o1-mini: 34.8 (#180)
- Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: 24.9 (#259)

| Benchmark | o1-mini | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 62.4% | 46.1% |
| Confabulations | 18.6% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1316 | — |

## Multilingual

- o1-mini: 43.8 (#177)
- Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: —

| Benchmark | o1-mini | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1289 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1314 | — |
| LMArena French | 1292 | — |
| LMArena German | 1278 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1245 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1223 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1283 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1302 | — |

## Instruction Following

- o1-mini: 67.0 (#200)
- Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: —

| Benchmark | o1-mini | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 65.4% | — |
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1304 | — |

## Long Context

- o1-mini: 40.1 (#156)
- Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: —

| Benchmark | o1-mini | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1321 | — |

## Writing & Preference

- o1-mini: 48.6 (#196)
- Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: —

| Benchmark | o1-mini | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1317 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1244 | — |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 64.9% | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1314 | — |
| LiveBench Language | 40.9% | — |

## FAQ

### Is o1-mini better than Qwen2.5 32B Instruct?

o1-mini is the stronger model overall, scoring 33.7 to 29.7 on the Noometry Index.

### Is o1-mini or Qwen2.5 32B Instruct better for coding?

Qwen2.5 32B Instruct scores higher on coding benchmarks: 38.1 versus 35.1 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do o1-mini and Qwen2.5 32B Instruct share?

4 benchmarks have published results for both models. o1-mini has 39 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5 32B Instruct has 7.