# Qwen Turbo vs Qwen2.5-Coder-32B

> Qwen2.5-Coder-32B is the stronger model overall, scoring 33.4 to 27.1 on the Noometry Index. Qwen Turbo costs 8.5× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen2.5-Coder-32B's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/qwen-turbo-vs-qwen2-5-coder-32b
- Last updated: 2026-10-12
- Shared benchmarks: 0

## Summary

- The widest gap is in math, where Qwen2.5-Coder-32B leads 33.3 to 15.3.
- Qwen Turbo is cheaper at $0.05 / $0.20 per million input/output tokens, against $0.66 / $1 for Qwen2.5-Coder-32B.
- Qwen Turbo accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 33K.
- Qwen2.5-Coder-32B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | Qwen Turbo | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 27.1 | 33.4 |
| Rank | 335 | 245 |
| Context | 1M | 33K |
| Input $/M | $0.05 | $0.66 |
| Output $/M | $0.20 | $1 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |

## Coding

- Qwen Turbo: —
- Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 22.6 (#333)

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

## Reasoning

- Qwen Turbo: —
- Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 21.2 (#225)

| Benchmark | Qwen Turbo | 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

- Qwen Turbo: 15.3 (#297)
- Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 33.3 (#204)

| Benchmark | Qwen Turbo | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 6.1% | — |
| LiveBench Math | — | 46.6% |
| LMArena Math | — | 1251 |
| MATH Level 5 | 56.2% | — |
| GSM8K | — | 93% |

## Knowledge

- Qwen Turbo: 22.2 (#272)
- Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 33.4 (#203)

| Benchmark | Qwen Turbo | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 41.8% | — |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1221 |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | — | 70.5% |
| MMLU | — | 79.1% |

## Multilingual

- Qwen Turbo: —
- Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 37.8 (#235)

| Benchmark | Qwen Turbo | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1205 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1222 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1228 |

## Instruction Following

- Qwen Turbo: —
- Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 61.4 (#245)

| Benchmark | Qwen Turbo | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Instruction Following | — | 58.7% |
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1223 |

## Long Context

- Qwen Turbo: —
- Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 38.0 (#208)

| Benchmark | Qwen Turbo | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1251 |

## Writing & Preference

- Qwen Turbo: —
- Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 41.6 (#240)

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

## FAQ

### Is Qwen Turbo better than Qwen2.5-Coder-32B?

Qwen2.5-Coder-32B is the stronger model overall, scoring 33.4 to 27.1 on the Noometry Index. Qwen Turbo costs 8.5× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen2.5-Coder-32B's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

### Which is cheaper, Qwen Turbo or Qwen2.5-Coder-32B?

Qwen Turbo is cheaper. It lists at $0.05 per million input tokens and $0.20 per million output tokens; Qwen2.5-Coder-32B lists at $0.66 and $1.

### Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen Turbo does, with 1M tokens against 33K.

### How many benchmarks do Qwen Turbo and Qwen2.5-Coder-32B share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Qwen Turbo has 3 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5-Coder-32B has 31.