Noometry

Model comparison

Grok-3 mini vs Qwen2.5-Coder-32B

Grok-3 mini is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.0 to 32.9 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 14 shared benchmarks.

Grok-3 mini xAI

41.0

Rank #130 Confirmed

Qwen2.5-Coder-32B Alibaba (Qwen)

32.9

Rank #239 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 14 benchmarks with published results for both. Grok-3 mini scores higher in 7 categories and Qwen2.5-Coder-32B in 1 category; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in coding, where Grok-3 mini leads 40.4 to 22.4.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is Aider Polyglot: 49.3% for Grok-3 mini and 16.4% for Qwen2.5-Coder-32B.
  • Qwen2.5-Coder-32B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Grok-3 miniQwen2.5-Coder-32B
ProviderxAIAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index41.032.9
Released2025-04-092024-09-18
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window—33K
Max output—29K
Input $ / M tokens—$0.66
Output $ / M tokens—$1
Results tracked3531

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

Category by category

Coding Grok-3 mini leads

Grok-3 mini: 40.4 (#126), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 22.4 (#328)

BenchmarkGrok-3 miniQwen2.5-Coder-32B
Aider Polyglot49.3%16.4%
LMArena Coding13801276
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)—9%
WeirdML42.6%—
BigCodeBench Instruct—49%
LiveBench Coding—56.9%
BigCodeBench Complete—58%
HumanEval+—87.2%
MBPP+—77%

Reasoning Qwen2.5-Coder-32B leads

Grok-3 mini: 13.8 (#323), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 20.4 (#220)

BenchmarkGrok-3 miniQwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Hard Prompts13741251
Epoch Capabilities Index140.35119.41
ARC-AGI-20.4%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark61.3%—
ARC-AGI-116.5%—
LiveBench Reasoning—42.1%
LiveBench Data Analysis—49.9%
HellaSwag—83%
LiveBench—46.2%
WinoGrande—80.8%

Math Grok-3 mini leads

Grok-3 mini: 40.3 (#78), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 30.8 (#203)

BenchmarkGrok-3 miniQwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Math13861251
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202577.8%—
Omni-MATH31.8%—
LiveBench Math—46.6%
MATH Level 590.9%—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)5.9%—
GSM8K—93%

Knowledge Grok-3 mini leads

Grok-3 mini: 46.3 (#75), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 32.9 (#200)

BenchmarkGrok-3 miniQwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Expert13951221
GPQA Diamond76.3%—
MMLU-Pro79.9%—
Confabulations10.8%—
GPQA (HELM)67.5%—
ARC (AI2) Challenge—70.5%
MMLU—79.1%

Multilingual Grok-3 mini leads

Grok-3 mini: 48.3 (#141), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 38.0 (#230)

BenchmarkGrok-3 miniQwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Non-English13521205
LMArena Chinese13871222
LMArena Russian13521228
LMArena French1357—
LMArena German1350—
LMArena Japanese1343—
LMArena Korean1336—
LMArena Spanish1379—

Instruction Following Grok-3 mini leads

Grok-3 mini: 78.7 (#8), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 61.6 (#240)

BenchmarkGrok-3 miniQwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Instruction Following13561223
LiveBench Instruction Following—58.7%
IFEval95.1%—

Long Context Grok-3 mini leads

Grok-3 mini: 41.0 (#142), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 37.9 (#204)

BenchmarkGrok-3 miniQwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Longer Query13721251
Fiction.LiveBench66.7%—

Writing & Preference Grok-3 mini leads

Grok-3 mini: 52.7 (#163), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 41.8 (#235)

BenchmarkGrok-3 miniQwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Text13701230
LMArena Creative Writing13421174
LMArena Multi-Turn13551222
Short-Story Creative Writing73.5%—
WildBench65.1%—
LiveBench Language—23.3%

Frequently asked questions

Is Grok-3 mini better than Qwen2.5-Coder-32B?

Grok-3 mini is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.0 to 32.9 on the Noometry Index.

Is Grok-3 mini or Qwen2.5-Coder-32B better for coding?

Grok-3 mini scores higher on coding benchmarks: 40.4 versus 22.4 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Grok-3 mini and Qwen2.5-Coder-32B share?

14 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok-3 mini has 35 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5-Coder-32B has 31.

Related comparisons

Go deeper