# Qwen2.5 72B Instruct vs Qwen2.5-Coder-32B

> Qwen2.5-Coder-32B is the stronger model overall, scoring 33.4 to 31.9 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/qwen2-5-72b-instruct-vs-qwen2-5-coder-32b
- Last updated: 2026-10-12
- Shared benchmarks: 19

## Summary

- They share 19 benchmarks with published results for both. Qwen2.5 72B Instruct scores higher in 6 categories and Qwen2.5-Coder-32B in 2 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Qwen2.5-Coder-32B leads 33.3 to 19.3.
- Qwen2.5-Coder-32B is cheaper at $0.66 / $1 per million input/output tokens, against $1.40 / $5.60 for Qwen2.5 72B Instruct.
- Qwen2.5 72B Instruct accepts more context: 131K tokens versus 33K.

## Snapshot

| | Qwen2.5 72B Instruct | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 31.9 | 33.4 |
| Rank | 267 | 245 |
| Context | 131K | 33K |
| Input $/M | $1.40 | $0.66 |
| Output $/M | $5.60 | $1 |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- Qwen2.5 72B Instruct: 33.2 (#260)
- Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 22.6 (#333)

| Benchmark | Qwen2.5 72B Instruct | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 45.8% | 49% |
| LMArena Coding | 1292 | 1276 |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 55.9% | 58% |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | — | 9% |
| Aider Polyglot | — | 16.4% |
| WeirdML | 16% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | — | 56.9% |
| HumanEval+ | — | 87.2% |
| MBPP+ | — | 77% |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Qwen2.5 72B Instruct: 22.1 (#133)
- Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: —

| Benchmark | Qwen2.5 72B Instruct | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| TheAgentCompany | 5.7% | — |
| BALROG | 16.2% | — |
| METR Time Horizons | 35.8% | — |

## Reasoning

- Qwen2.5 72B Instruct: 22.3 (#199)
- Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 21.2 (#225)

| Benchmark | Qwen2.5 72B Instruct | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1271 | 1251 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 129 | 119.49 |
| HellaSwag | 84.8% | 83% |
| WinoGrande | 82.3% | 80.8% |
| LiveBench Reasoning | — | 42.1% |
| DTBench | 62.9% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | — | 49.9% |
| LMCA | 13.4% | — |
| BIG-Bench Hard | 79.8% | — |
| ForecastBench | 57.5 | — |
| LiveBench | — | 46.2% |
| PIQA | 82.6% | — |

## Math

- Qwen2.5 72B Instruct: 19.3 (#287)
- Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 33.3 (#204)

| Benchmark | Qwen2.5 72B Instruct | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1283 | 1251 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 8.1% | — |
| Omni-MATH | 33% | — |
| LiveBench Math | — | 46.6% |
| MATH Level 5 | 63.2% | — |
| GSM8K | — | 93% |

## Knowledge

- Qwen2.5 72B Instruct: 27.0 (#253)
- Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 33.4 (#203)

| Benchmark | Qwen2.5 72B Instruct | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1245 | 1221 |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | 94.5% | 70.5% |
| MMLU | 85.3% | 79.1% |
| GPQA Diamond | 49.1% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | 63.1% | — |
| Confabulations | 19.1% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 42.6% | — |
| TriviaQA | 71.9% | — |

## Multilingual

- Qwen2.5 72B Instruct: 41.0 (#213)
- Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 37.8 (#235)

| Benchmark | Qwen2.5 72B Instruct | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1252 | 1205 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1272 | 1222 |
| LMArena Russian | 1264 | 1228 |
| LMArena French | 1280 | — |
| LMArena German | 1234 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1180 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1188 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1256 | — |

## Instruction Following

- Qwen2.5 72B Instruct: 65.5 (#221)
- Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 61.4 (#245)

| Benchmark | Qwen2.5 72B Instruct | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1254 | 1223 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | — | 58.7% |
| IFEval | 80.6% | — |

## Long Context

- Qwen2.5 72B Instruct: 38.9 (#188)
- Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 38.0 (#208)

| Benchmark | Qwen2.5 72B Instruct | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1282 | 1251 |

## Writing & Preference

- Qwen2.5 72B Instruct: 46.7 (#215)
- Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 41.6 (#240)

| Benchmark | Qwen2.5 72B Instruct | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1269 | 1230 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1221 | 1174 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1272 | 1222 |
| WildBench | 80.2% | — |
| LiveBench Language | — | 23.3% |

## FAQ

### Is Qwen2.5 72B Instruct better than Qwen2.5-Coder-32B?

Qwen2.5-Coder-32B is the stronger model overall, scoring 33.4 to 31.9 on the Noometry Index.

### Which is cheaper, Qwen2.5 72B Instruct or Qwen2.5-Coder-32B?

Qwen2.5-Coder-32B is cheaper. It lists at $0.66 per million input tokens and $1 per million output tokens; Qwen2.5 72B Instruct lists at $1.40 and $5.60.

### Is Qwen2.5 72B Instruct or Qwen2.5-Coder-32B better for coding?

Qwen2.5 72B Instruct scores higher on coding benchmarks: 33.2 versus 22.6 in the Noometry coding category.

### Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen2.5 72B Instruct does, with 131K tokens against 33K.

### How many benchmarks do Qwen2.5 72B Instruct and Qwen2.5-Coder-32B share?

19 benchmarks have published results for both models. Qwen2.5 72B Instruct has 43 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5-Coder-32B has 31.