Model comparison

Hy3 vs Qwen2.5-Coder-32B

Hy3 is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.6 to 32.9 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 12 shared benchmarks.

Hy3 Tencent

43.6

Rank #79 Confirmed

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

32.9

Rank #239 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. Hy3 scores higher in 8 categories and Qwen2.5-Coder-32B in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in coding, where Hy3 leads 46.6 to 22.4.
  • Hy3 is cheaper at $0.13 / $0.53 per million input/output tokens, against $0.66 / $1 for Qwen2.5-Coder-32B.
  • Hy3 accepts more context: 262K tokens versus 33K.

Side by side

Hy3 and Qwen2.5-Coder-32B specifications
Hy3Qwen2.5-Coder-32B
ProviderTencentAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index43.632.9
Released2026-07-062024-09-18
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window262K33K
Max output128K29K
Input $ / M tokens$0.13$0.66
Output $ / M tokens$0.53$1
Results tracked1731

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

Category by category

Coding Hy3 leads

Hy3: 46.6 (#60), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 22.4 (#328)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkHy3Qwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Coding14651276
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)—9%
Aider Polyglot—16.4%
LMArena WebDev1509—
BigCodeBench Instruct—49%
LiveBench Coding—56.9%
BigCodeBench Complete—58%
HumanEval+—87.2%
MBPP+—77%

Reasoning Hy3 leads

Hy3: 25.0 (#134), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 20.4 (#220)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkHy3Qwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Hard Prompts14491251
NYT Connections (extended)41.2%—
LiveBench Reasoning—42.1%
LiveBench Data Analysis—49.9%
Epoch Capabilities Index—119.41
HellaSwag—83%
LiveBench—46.2%
WinoGrande—80.8%

Math Hy3 leads

Hy3: 37.4 (#98), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 30.8 (#203)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkHy3Qwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Math14751251
LiveBench Math—46.6%
GSM8K—93%

Knowledge Hy3 leads

Hy3: 40.2 (#108), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 32.9 (#200)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkHy3Qwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Expert14611221
ARC (AI2) Challenge—70.5%
MMLU—79.1%

Multilingual Hy3 leads

Hy3: 53.7 (#60), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 38.0 (#230)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkHy3Qwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Non-English14271205
LMArena Chinese14961222
LMArena Russian14351228
LMArena French1461—
LMArena Korean1390—
LMArena Spanish1448—

Instruction Following Hy3 leads

Hy3: 75.3 (#68), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 61.6 (#240)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkHy3Qwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Instruction Following14251223
LiveBench Instruction Following—58.7%

Long Context Hy3 leads

Hy3: 44.1 (#70), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 37.9 (#204)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkHy3Qwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Longer Query14431251

Writing & Preference Hy3 leads

Hy3: 62.5 (#75), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 41.8 (#235)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkHy3Qwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Text14421230
LMArena Creative Writing13991174
LMArena Multi-Turn14361222
LiveBench Language—23.3%

Frequently asked questions

Is Hy3 better than Qwen2.5-Coder-32B?

Hy3 is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.6 to 32.9 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, Hy3 or Qwen2.5-Coder-32B?

Hy3 is cheaper. It lists at $0.13 per million input tokens and $0.53 per million output tokens; Qwen2.5-Coder-32B lists at $0.66 and $1.

Is Hy3 or Qwen2.5-Coder-32B better for coding?

Hy3 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 46.6 versus 22.4 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Hy3 does, with 262K tokens against 33K.

How many benchmarks do Hy3 and Qwen2.5-Coder-32B share?

12 benchmarks have published results for both models. Hy3 has 17 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5-Coder-32B has 31.

Related comparisons

Go deeper