# Qwen1.5-32B vs Qwen2.5-Coder-32B

> Qwen2.5-Coder-32B is the stronger model overall, scoring 32.9 to 30.0 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/qwen1-5-32b-vs-qwen2-5-coder-32b
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 15

## Summary

- They share 15 benchmarks with published results for both. Qwen1.5-32B scores higher in 2 categories and Qwen2.5-Coder-32B in 6 categories; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen2.5-Coder-32B leads 32.9 to 13.5.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is BigCodeBench Instruct: 32.3% for Qwen1.5-32B and 49% for Qwen2.5-Coder-32B.

## Snapshot

| | Qwen1.5-32B | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 30.0 | 32.9 |
| Rank | 288 | 239 |
| Context | — | 33K |
| Input $/M | — | $0.66 |
| Output $/M | — | $1 |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- Qwen1.5-32B: 31.1 (#278)
- Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 22.4 (#328)

| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-32B | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 32.3% | 49% |
| LMArena Coding | 1155 | 1276 |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 42% | 58% |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | — | 9% |
| Aider Polyglot | — | 16.4% |
| LiveBench Coding | — | 56.9% |
| HumanEval+ | — | 87.2% |
| MBPP+ | — | 77% |

## Reasoning

- Qwen1.5-32B: 20.9 (#210)
- Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 20.4 (#220)

| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-32B | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1131 | 1251 |
| LiveBench Reasoning | — | 42.1% |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | — | 49.9% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 119.41 |
| HellaSwag | — | 83% |
| LiveBench | — | 46.2% |
| WinoGrande | — | 80.8% |

## Math

- Qwen1.5-32B: 30.5 (#207)
- Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 30.8 (#203)

| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-32B | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1155 | 1251 |
| LiveBench Math | — | 46.6% |
| GSM8K | — | 93% |

## Knowledge

- Qwen1.5-32B: 13.5 (#291)
- Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 32.9 (#200)

| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-32B | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1126 | 1221 |
| MMLU | 74.4% | 79.1% |
| GPQA Diamond | 30.7% | — |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | — | 70.5% |

## Multilingual

- Qwen1.5-32B: 31.6 (#254)
- Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 38.0 (#230)

| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-32B | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1106 | 1205 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1176 | 1222 |
| LMArena Russian | 1073 | 1228 |
| LMArena French | 1100 | — |
| LMArena German | 1058 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1027 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1007 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1089 | — |

## Instruction Following

- Qwen1.5-32B: 58.0 (#260)
- Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 61.6 (#240)

| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-32B | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1116 | 1223 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | — | 58.7% |

## Long Context

- Qwen1.5-32B: 34.7 (#241)
- Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 37.9 (#204)

| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-32B | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1146 | 1251 |

## Writing & Preference

- Qwen1.5-32B: 34.4 (#266)
- Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 41.8 (#235)

| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-32B | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1137 | 1230 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1083 | 1174 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1140 | 1222 |
| LiveBench Language | — | 23.3% |

## FAQ

### Is Qwen1.5-32B better than Qwen2.5-Coder-32B?

Qwen2.5-Coder-32B is the stronger model overall, scoring 32.9 to 30.0 on the Noometry Index.

### Is Qwen1.5-32B or Qwen2.5-Coder-32B better for coding?

Qwen1.5-32B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 31.1 versus 22.4 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do Qwen1.5-32B and Qwen2.5-Coder-32B share?

15 benchmarks have published results for both models. Qwen1.5-32B has 21 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5-Coder-32B has 31.