Model comparison

Granite 4.0 H Small vs Qwen2.5-Coder-32B

Granite 4.0 H Small is the stronger model overall, scoring 36.5 to 33.4 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 12 shared benchmarks.

Granite 4.0 H Small IBM

36.5

Rank #214 Confirmed

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

33.4

Rank #245 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. Granite 4.0 H Small scores higher in 5 categories and Qwen2.5-Coder-32B in 3 categories; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in coding, where Granite 4.0 H Small leads 36.4 to 22.6.

Side by side

Granite 4.0 H Small and Qwen2.5-Coder-32B specifications
Granite 4.0 H SmallQwen2.5-Coder-32B
ProviderIBMAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index36.533.4
Released—2024-09-18
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window—33K
Max output—29K
Input $ / M tokens—$0.66
Output $ / M tokens—$1
Results tracked1931

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

Category by category

Coding Granite 4.0 H Small leads

Granite 4.0 H Small: 36.4 (#209), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 22.6 (#333)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 4.0 H SmallQwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Coding12491276
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)—9%
Aider Polyglot—16.4%
BigCodeBench Instruct—49%
LiveBench Coding—56.9%
BigCodeBench Complete—58%
HumanEval+—87.2%
MBPP+—77%

Reasoning Granite 4.0 H Small leads

Granite 4.0 H Small: 24.4 (#163), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 21.2 (#225)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 4.0 H SmallQwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Hard Prompts12401251
LiveBench Reasoning—42.1%
LiveBench Data Analysis—49.9%
Epoch Capabilities Index—119.49
HellaSwag—83%
LiveBench—46.2%
WinoGrande—80.8%

Math Qwen2.5-Coder-32B leads

Granite 4.0 H Small: 31.4 (#223), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 33.3 (#204)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 4.0 H SmallQwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Math12471251
Omni-MATH29.6%—
LiveBench Math—46.6%
GSM8K—93%

Knowledge Qwen2.5-Coder-32B leads

Granite 4.0 H Small: 32.0 (#215), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 33.4 (#203)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 4.0 H SmallQwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Expert12511221
MMLU-Pro56.9%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate5.2%—
GPQA (HELM)38.3%—
ARC (AI2) Challenge—70.5%
MMLU—79.1%

Multilingual Too close to call

Granite 4.0 H Small: 38.6 (#228), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 37.8 (#235)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 4.0 H SmallQwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Non-English12161205
LMArena Chinese12491222
LMArena Russian12011228
LMArena Spanish1258—

Instruction Following Granite 4.0 H Small leads

Granite 4.0 H Small: 68.7 (#183), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 61.4 (#245)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 4.0 H SmallQwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Instruction Following12221223
LiveBench Instruction Following—58.7%
IFEval89%—

Long Context Too close to call

Granite 4.0 H Small: 37.7 (#213), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 38.0 (#208)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 4.0 H SmallQwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Longer Query12421251

Writing & Preference Granite 4.0 H Small leads

Granite 4.0 H Small: 43.8 (#227), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 41.6 (#240)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 4.0 H SmallQwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Text12411230
LMArena Creative Writing12111174
LMArena Multi-Turn12421222
WildBench73.9%—
LiveBench Language—23.3%

Frequently asked questions

Is Granite 4.0 H Small better than Qwen2.5-Coder-32B?

Granite 4.0 H Small is the stronger model overall, scoring 36.5 to 33.4 on the Noometry Index.

Is Granite 4.0 H Small or Qwen2.5-Coder-32B better for coding?

Granite 4.0 H Small scores higher on coding benchmarks: 36.4 versus 22.6 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Granite 4.0 H Small and Qwen2.5-Coder-32B share?

12 benchmarks have published results for both models. Granite 4.0 H Small has 19 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5-Coder-32B has 31.

Related comparisons

Go deeper