# Qwen2.5 32B Instruct vs Solar Pro4

> Solar Pro4 is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.5 to 29.7 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/qwen2-5-32b-instruct-vs-solar-pro4
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 0

## Summary

- The widest gap is in math, where Solar Pro4 leads 36.1 to 15.3.
- Solar Pro4 is cheaper at $0.30 / $1.20 per million input/output tokens, against $0.70 / $2.80 for Qwen2.5 32B Instruct.
- Solar Pro4 accepts more context: 524K tokens versus 131K.
- Qwen2.5 32B Instruct has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct | Solar Pro4 |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | Upstage |
| Noometry Index | 29.7 | 41.5 |
| Rank | 291 | 123 |
| Context | 131K | 524K |
| Input $/M | $0.70 | $0.30 |
| Output $/M | $2.80 | $1.20 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |

## Coding

- Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: 38.1 (#165)
- Solar Pro4: 39.9 (#135)

| Benchmark | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct | Solar Pro4 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1371 |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 45% | — |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1439 |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 52.3% | — |

## Reasoning

- Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: 18.5 (#262)
- Solar Pro4: 27.3 (#107)

| Benchmark | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct | Solar Pro4 |
|---|---|---|
| Chess Puzzles | 0% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1398 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 128.52 | — |

## Math

- Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: 15.3 (#289)
- Solar Pro4: 36.1 (#129)

| Benchmark | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct | Solar Pro4 |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 7.4% | — |
| LMArena Math | — | 1418 |
| MATH Level 5 | 56.1% | — |

## Knowledge

- Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: 24.9 (#259)
- Solar Pro4: 39.0 (#128)

| Benchmark | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct | Solar Pro4 |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 46.1% | — |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1421 |

## Multilingual

- Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: —
- Solar Pro4: 49.0 (#134)

| Benchmark | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct | Solar Pro4 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1362 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1417 |
| LMArena French | — | 1403 |
| LMArena German | — | 1351 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1300 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1383 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1360 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1408 |

## Instruction Following

- Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: —
- Solar Pro4: 72.8 (#128)

| Benchmark | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct | Solar Pro4 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1376 |

## Long Context

- Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: —
- Solar Pro4: 42.0 (#125)

| Benchmark | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct | Solar Pro4 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1379 |

## Writing & Preference

- Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: —
- Solar Pro4: 56.7 (#133)

| Benchmark | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct | Solar Pro4 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1386 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1313 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1391 |

## FAQ

### Is Qwen2.5 32B Instruct better than Solar Pro4?

Solar Pro4 is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.5 to 29.7 on the Noometry Index.

### Which is cheaper, Qwen2.5 32B Instruct or Solar Pro4?

Solar Pro4 is cheaper. It lists at $0.30 per million input tokens and $1.20 per million output tokens; Qwen2.5 32B Instruct lists at $0.70 and $2.80.

### Is Qwen2.5 32B Instruct or Solar Pro4 better for coding?

Solar Pro4 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 39.9 versus 38.1 in the Noometry coding category.

### Which has the bigger context window?

Solar Pro4 does, with 524K tokens against 131K.

### How many benchmarks do Qwen2.5 32B Instruct and Solar Pro4 share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Qwen2.5 32B Instruct has 7 scored results on Noometry and Solar Pro4 has 18.