Model comparison

Mistral Medium 3.5 vs Qwen2.5-Coder-32B

Mistral Medium 3.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.6 to 32.9 on the Noometry Index. Qwen2.5-Coder-32B costs 4.0× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Mistral Medium 3.5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified October 10, 2026. 13 shared benchmarks.

Mistral Medium 3.5

Mistral AI

39.6

Rank #151 Confirmed

Qwen2.5-Coder-32B

Alibaba (Qwen)

32.9

Rank #239 Confirmed

Summary

They share 13 benchmarks with published results for both. Mistral Medium 3.5 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 writing & preference, where Mistral Medium 3.5 leads 58.6 to 41.8.
Qwen2.5-Coder-32B is cheaper at $0.66 / $1 per million input/output tokens, against $1.50 / $7.50 for Mistral Medium 3.5.
Mistral Medium 3.5 accepts more context: 262K tokens versus 33K.

Side by side

Mistral Medium 3.5 and Qwen2.5-Coder-32B specifications
	Mistral Medium 3.5	Qwen2.5-Coder-32B
Provider	Mistral AI	Alibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index	39.6	32.9
Released	—	2024-09-18
Weights	Open	Open
Context window	262K	33K
Max output	210K	29K
Input $ / M tokens	$1.50	$0.66
Output $ / M tokens	$7.50	$1
Results tracked	22	31

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

Category by category

Coding Mistral Medium 3.5 leads

Mistral Medium 3.5: 35.7 (#208), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 22.4 (#328)

Coding benchmarks
Benchmark	Mistral Medium 3.5	Qwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Coding	1461	1276
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)	—	9%
Aider Polyglot	—	16.4%
LMArena WebDev	1263	—
BigCodeBench Instruct	—	49%
LiveBench Coding	—	56.9%
BigCodeBench Complete	—	58%
HumanEval+	—	87.2%
MBPP+	—	77%

Reasoning Qwen2.5-Coder-32B leads

Mistral Medium 3.5: 16.6 (#290), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 20.4 (#220)

Reasoning benchmarks
Benchmark	Mistral Medium 3.5	Qwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Hard Prompts	1436	1251
Epoch Capabilities Index	141.42	119.41
Kagi LLM Benchmark	41.4%	—
NYT Connections (extended)	12.9%	—
LiveBench Reasoning	—	42.1%
LiveBench Data Analysis	—	49.9%
HellaSwag	—	83%
LiveBench	—	46.2%
WinoGrande	—	80.8%

Math Mistral Medium 3.5 leads

Mistral Medium 3.5: 36.4 (#113), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 30.8 (#203)

Math benchmarks
Benchmark	Mistral Medium 3.5	Qwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Math	1432	1251
LiveBench Math	—	46.6%
GSM8K	—	93%

Knowledge Mistral Medium 3.5 leads

Mistral Medium 3.5: 39.3 (#123), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 32.9 (#200)

Knowledge benchmarks
Benchmark	Mistral Medium 3.5	Qwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Expert	1431	1221
ARC (AI2) Challenge	—	70.5%
MMLU	—	79.1%

Multimodal Not comparable

Mistral Medium 3.5: 37.6 (#64), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: —

Multimodal benchmarks
Benchmark	Mistral Medium 3.5	Qwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Vision	1222	—

Multilingual Mistral Medium 3.5 leads

Mistral Medium 3.5: 52.1 (#93), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 38.0 (#230)

Multilingual benchmarks
Benchmark	Mistral Medium 3.5	Qwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Non-English	1405	1205
LMArena Chinese	1443	1222
LMArena Russian	1396	1228
LMArena French	1448	—
LMArena German	1453	—
LMArena Korean	1387	—
LMArena Spanish	1406	—

Instruction Following Mistral Medium 3.5 leads

Mistral Medium 3.5: 74.7 (#87), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 61.6 (#240)

Instruction Following benchmarks
Benchmark	Mistral Medium 3.5	Qwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Instruction Following	1414	1223
LiveBench Instruction Following	—	58.7%

Long Context Mistral Medium 3.5 leads

Mistral Medium 3.5: 43.2 (#101), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 37.9 (#204)

Long Context benchmarks
Benchmark	Mistral Medium 3.5	Qwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Longer Query	1414	1251

Writing & Preference Mistral Medium 3.5 leads

Mistral Medium 3.5: 58.6 (#113), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 41.8 (#235)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
Benchmark	Mistral Medium 3.5	Qwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Text	1421	1230
LMArena Creative Writing	1372	1174
LMArena Multi-Turn	1423	1222
EQ-Bench 4	993	—
LiveBench Language	—	23.3%

Frequently asked questions

Is Mistral Medium 3.5 better than Qwen2.5-Coder-32B?

Which is cheaper, Mistral Medium 3.5 or Qwen2.5-Coder-32B?

Qwen2.5-Coder-32B is cheaper. It lists at $0.66 per million input tokens and $1 per million output tokens; Mistral Medium 3.5 lists at $1.50 and $7.50.

Is Mistral Medium 3.5 or Qwen2.5-Coder-32B better for coding?

Mistral Medium 3.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 35.7 versus 22.4 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Mistral Medium 3.5 does, with 262K tokens against 33K.

How many benchmarks do Mistral Medium 3.5 and Qwen2.5-Coder-32B share?

13 benchmarks have published results for both models. Mistral Medium 3.5 has 22 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5-Coder-32B has 31.