Model comparison

DBRX vs Qwen2.5 32B Instruct

DBRX and Qwen2.5 32B Instruct score almost the same on the Noometry Index (29.4 vs 30.1), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.

Last verified . 2 shared benchmarks.

DBRX Databricks

29.4

Rank #311 Confirmed

Qwen2.5 32B Instruct Alibaba (Qwen)

30.1

Rank #297 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 2 benchmarks with published results for both. DBRX scores higher in 2 categories and Qwen2.5 32B Instruct in 2 categories; 4 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen2.5 32B Instruct leads 24.9 to 14.9.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is MATH Level 5: 11.7% for DBRX and 56.1% for Qwen2.5 32B Instruct.

Side by side

DBRX and Qwen2.5 32B Instruct specifications
DBRXQwen2.5 32B Instruct
ProviderDatabricksAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index29.430.1
Released2024-03-272024-09
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window—131K
Max output—8K
Input $ / M tokens—$0.70
Output $ / M tokens—$2.80
Results tracked217

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding Qwen2.5 32B Instruct leads

DBRX: 32.9 (#266), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: 38.7 (#169)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkDBRXQwen2.5 32B Instruct
BigCodeBench Instruct—45%
LMArena Coding1132—
BigCodeBench Complete—52.3%
HumanEval+70.1%—
MBPP+55.8%—

Reasoning DBRX leads

DBRX: 21.4 (#222), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: 19.2 (#266)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkDBRXQwen2.5 32B Instruct
Chess Puzzles—0%
LMArena Hard Prompts1113—
Epoch Capabilities Index—128.52

Math DBRX leads

DBRX: 24.3 (#269), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: 16.2 (#296)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkDBRXQwen2.5 32B Instruct
MATH Level 511.7%56.1%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—7.4%
LMArena Math1145—

Knowledge Qwen2.5 32B Instruct leads

DBRX: 14.9 (#294), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: 24.9 (#266)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkDBRXQwen2.5 32B Instruct
GPQA Diamond32.9%46.1%
LMArena Expert1076—

Multilingual Not comparable

DBRX: 29.3 (#268), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: —

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkDBRXQwen2.5 32B Instruct
LMArena Non-English1071—
LMArena Chinese1068—
LMArena French1096—
LMArena German1057—
LMArena Japanese990—
LMArena Korean993—
LMArena Russian1078—
LMArena Spanish1064—

Instruction Following Not comparable

DBRX: 57.5 (#270), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: —

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkDBRXQwen2.5 32B Instruct
LMArena Instruction Following1112—

Long Context Not comparable

DBRX: 33.7 (#258), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: —

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkDBRXQwen2.5 32B Instruct
LMArena Longer Query1112—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

DBRX: 33.6 (#275), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: —

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkDBRXQwen2.5 32B Instruct
LMArena Text1119—
LMArena Creative Writing1104—
LMArena Multi-Turn1111—

Frequently asked questions

Is DBRX better than Qwen2.5 32B Instruct?

DBRX and Qwen2.5 32B Instruct score almost the same on the Noometry Index (29.4 vs 30.1), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.

Is DBRX or Qwen2.5 32B Instruct better for coding?

Qwen2.5 32B Instruct scores higher on coding benchmarks: 38.7 versus 32.9 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do DBRX and Qwen2.5 32B Instruct share?

2 benchmarks have published results for both models. DBRX has 21 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5 32B Instruct has 7.

Related comparisons

Go deeper