Model comparison
Qwen2.5 7B Instruct vs Qwen3 Coder Next
Qwen3 Coder Next is the stronger model overall, scoring 34.3 to 29.0 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Qwen3 Coder Next leads 22.4 to 14.8.
- Qwen3 Coder Next is cheaper at $0.12 / $0.80 per million input/output tokens, against $0.17 / $0.70 for Qwen2.5 7B Instruct.
- Qwen3 Coder Next accepts more context: 262K tokens versus 131K.
Side by side
| Qwen2.5 7B Instruct | Qwen3 Coder Next | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 29.0 | 34.3 |
| Released | 2024-09 | 2026-02-02 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 131K | 262K |
| Max output | 8K | 66K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.17 | $0.12 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.70 | $0.80 |
| Results tracked | 15 | 3 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Too close to call
Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 36.5 (#208), Qwen3 Coder Next: 36.3 (#210)
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct | Qwen3 Coder Next |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | — | 32.3% |
| WeirdML | — | 34.4% |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 37.6% | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 46.1% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 23.8 (#124), Qwen3 Coder Next: —
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct | Qwen3 Coder Next |
|---|---|---|
| BALROG | 7.8% | — |
Reasoning Qwen3 Coder Next leads
Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 14.8 (#322), Qwen3 Coder Next: 22.4 (#196)
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct | Qwen3 Coder Next |
|---|---|---|
| CritPt | — | 0% |
| Chess Puzzles | 0% | — |
| DTBench | 47.7% | — |
| LMCA | 6.4% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 118.51 | — |
Math Not comparable
Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 12.6 (#306), Qwen3 Coder Next: —
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct | Qwen3 Coder Next |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 2.5% | — |
| Omni-MATH | 29.4% | — |
Knowledge Not comparable
Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 17.0 (#286), Qwen3 Coder Next: —
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct | Qwen3 Coder Next |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 35.5% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | 53.9% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 34.1% | — |
| MMLU | 72.9% | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 63.2 (#231), Qwen3 Coder Next: —
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct | Qwen3 Coder Next |
|---|---|---|
| IFEval | 74.1% | — |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 48.8 (#195), Qwen3 Coder Next: —
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct | Qwen3 Coder Next |
|---|---|---|
| WildBench | 73.1% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Qwen2.5 7B Instruct better than Qwen3 Coder Next?
Qwen3 Coder Next is the stronger model overall, scoring 34.3 to 29.0 on the Noometry Index.
Which is cheaper, Qwen2.5 7B Instruct or Qwen3 Coder Next?
Qwen3 Coder Next is cheaper. It lists at $0.12 per million input tokens and $0.80 per million output tokens; Qwen2.5 7B Instruct lists at $0.17 and $0.70.
Is Qwen2.5 7B Instruct or Qwen3 Coder Next better for coding?
They score almost the same on coding (36.5 vs 36.3); test both on your own repository before choosing.
Which has the bigger context window?
Qwen3 Coder Next does, with 262K tokens against 131K.
How many benchmarks do Qwen2.5 7B Instruct and Qwen3 Coder Next share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Qwen2.5 7B Instruct has 15 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3 Coder Next has 3.