Model comparison
Codestral vs Qwen1.5-32B
Codestral and Qwen1.5-32B score almost the same on the Noometry Index (30.6 vs 30.5), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Last verified . 2 shared benchmarks.
Mistral AI
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 2 benchmarks with published results for both. Codestral scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen1.5-32B in 2 categories; 2 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in coding, where Qwen1.5-32B leads 31.7 to 27.3.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is BigCodeBench Complete: 52.5% for Codestral and 42% for Qwen1.5-32B.
- Qwen1.5-32B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Codestral | Qwen1.5-32B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Mistral AI | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 30.6 | 30.5 |
| Released | 2024-05-29 | 2024-02-04 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 256K | — |
| Max output | 8K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.30 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.90 | — |
| Results tracked | 7 | 21 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Qwen1.5-32B leads
Codestral: 27.3 (#321), Qwen1.5-32B: 31.7 (#282)
| Benchmark | Codestral | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 41.8% | 32.3% |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 52.5% | 42% |
| Aider Polyglot | 11.1% | — |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1155 |
| ALE-Bench | 137.78 | — |
| HumanEval+ | 73.8% | — |
| MBPP+ | 61.9% | — |
Reasoning Qwen1.5-32B leads
Codestral: 19.8 (#251), Qwen1.5-32B: 21.8 (#212)
| Benchmark | Codestral | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 32.5% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1130 |
Math Not comparable
Codestral: —, Qwen1.5-32B: 33.0 (#207)
| Benchmark | Codestral | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | — | 1155 |
Knowledge Not comparable
Codestral: —, Qwen1.5-32B: 13.5 (#296)
| Benchmark | Codestral | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 30.7% |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1126 |
| MMLU | — | 74.4% |
Multilingual Not comparable
Codestral: —, Qwen1.5-32B: 31.4 (#259)
| Benchmark | Codestral | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1106 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1177 |
| LMArena French | — | 1101 |
| LMArena German | — | 1058 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1027 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1008 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1073 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1089 |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Codestral: —, Qwen1.5-32B: 57.7 (#265)
| Benchmark | Codestral | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1116 |
Long Context Not comparable
Codestral: —, Qwen1.5-32B: 34.7 (#246)
| Benchmark | Codestral | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1146 |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Codestral: —, Qwen1.5-32B: 34.2 (#271)
| Benchmark | Codestral | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1137 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1083 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1140 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Codestral better than Qwen1.5-32B?
Codestral and Qwen1.5-32B score almost the same on the Noometry Index (30.6 vs 30.5), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Is Codestral or Qwen1.5-32B better for coding?
Qwen1.5-32B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 31.7 versus 27.3 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Codestral and Qwen1.5-32B share?
2 benchmarks have published results for both models. Codestral has 7 scored results on Noometry and Qwen1.5-32B has 21.