Model comparison
Claude 3.5 Sonnet vs Qwen2.5-Coder-32B
Claude 3.5 Sonnet is the stronger model overall, scoring 34.4 to 32.9 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 26 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 26 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude 3.5 Sonnet scores higher in 6 categories and Qwen2.5-Coder-32B in 2 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in coding, where Claude 3.5 Sonnet leads 39.5 to 22.4.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is Aider Polyglot: 51.6% for Claude 3.5 Sonnet and 16.4% for Qwen2.5-Coder-32B.
- Qwen2.5-Coder-32B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Claude 3.5 Sonnet | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 34.4 | 32.9 |
| Released | 2024-06-20 | 2024-09-18 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | — | 33K |
| Max output | — | 29K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.66 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $1 |
| Results tracked | 60 | 31 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Claude 3.5 Sonnet leads
Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 39.5 (#145), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 22.4 (#328)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| Aider Polyglot | 51.6% | 16.4% |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 46.8% | 49% |
| LiveBench Coding | 67.1% | 56.9% |
| LMArena Coding | 1343 | 1276 |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 58.6% | 58% |
| HumanEval+ | 81.7% | 87.2% |
| MBPP+ | 74.3% | 77% |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | — | 9% |
| GSO | 4.6% | — |
| WeirdML | 40% | — |
| CadEval | 48% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 32.1 (#61), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: —
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| TheAgentCompany | 24% | — |
| Cybench | 17.5% | — |
| BALROG | 32.6% | — |
| METR Time Horizons | 45.2% | — |
Reasoning Claude 3.5 Sonnet leads
Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 22.5 (#176), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 20.4 (#220)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Reasoning | 56.7% | 42.1% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1305 | 1251 |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 55% | 49.9% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 133.55 | 119.41 |
| LiveBench | 59% | 46.2% |
| SimpleBench | 41.4% | — |
| EnigmaEval | 0.9% | — |
| DTBench | 67.8% | — |
| ForecastBench | 60.7 | — |
| HellaSwag | — | 83% |
| WinoGrande | — | 80.8% |
Math Qwen2.5-Coder-32B leads
Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 18.0 (#282), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 30.8 (#203)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Math | 52.3% | 46.6% |
| LMArena Math | 1306 | 1251 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 8.5% | — |
| Omni-MATH | 27.6% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 56.9% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 2.1% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 0% | — |
| GSM8K | — | 93% |
Knowledge Qwen2.5-Coder-32B leads
Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 28.5 (#236), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 32.9 (#200)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1264 | 1221 |
| MMLU | 87.3% | 79.1% |
| GPQA Diamond | 55.3% | — |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 4.1% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | 77.7% | — |
| Confabulations | 19.9% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 56.5% | — |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | — | 70.5% |
Multimodal Not comparable
Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 26.0 (#115), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: —
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1125 | — |
| Video-MME | 60% | — |
| GeoBench | 62% | — |
| VPCT | 33% | — |
Multilingual Claude 3.5 Sonnet leads
Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 43.4 (#180), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 38.0 (#230)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1283 | 1205 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1271 | 1222 |
| LMArena Russian | 1305 | 1228 |
| LMArena French | 1304 | — |
| LMArena German | 1297 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1234 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1200 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1289 | — |
Instruction Following Claude 3.5 Sonnet leads
Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 69.0 (#177), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 61.6 (#240)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 69.3% | 58.7% |
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1297 | 1223 |
| IFEval | 85.5% | — |
Long Context Claude 3.5 Sonnet leads
Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 39.9 (#162), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 37.9 (#204)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1311 | 1251 |
Writing & Preference Claude 3.5 Sonnet leads
Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 53.0 (#159), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 41.8 (#235)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1298 | 1230 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1292 | 1174 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1326 | 1222 |
| LiveBench Language | 53.8% | 23.3% |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 80.3% | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1451 | — |
| WildBench | 79.2% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Claude 3.5 Sonnet better than Qwen2.5-Coder-32B?
Claude 3.5 Sonnet is the stronger model overall, scoring 34.4 to 32.9 on the Noometry Index.
Is Claude 3.5 Sonnet or Qwen2.5-Coder-32B better for coding?
Claude 3.5 Sonnet scores higher on coding benchmarks: 39.5 versus 22.4 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Claude 3.5 Sonnet and Qwen2.5-Coder-32B share?
26 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude 3.5 Sonnet has 60 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5-Coder-32B has 31.