Model comparison
Qwen2.5-Coder-32B vs Step 3
Step 3 is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.9 to 32.9 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 12 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)
StepFunSummary
- They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. Qwen2.5-Coder-32B scores higher in 0 categories and Step 3 in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in coding, where Step 3 leads 39.5 to 22.4.
Side by side
| Qwen2.5-Coder-32B | Step 3 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | StepFun |
| Noometry Index | 32.9 | 39.9 |
| Released | 2024-09-18 | — |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 33K | — |
| Max output | 29K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.66 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $1 | — |
| Results tracked | 31 | 17 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Step 3 leads
Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 22.4 (#328), Step 3: 39.5 (#144)
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B | Step 3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1276 | 1367 |
| 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 Step 3 leads
Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 20.4 (#220), Step 3: 27.6 (#102)
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B | Step 3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1251 | 1355 |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 62.3% |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 42.1% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 49.9% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 119.41 | — |
| HellaSwag | 83% | — |
| LiveBench | 46.2% | — |
| WinoGrande | 80.8% | — |
Math Step 3 leads
Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 30.8 (#203), Step 3: 34.9 (#148)
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B | Step 3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1251 | 1366 |
| LiveBench Math | 46.6% | — |
| GSM8K | 93% | — |
Knowledge Step 3 leads
Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 32.9 (#200), Step 3: 36.2 (#161)
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B | Step 3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1221 | 1333 |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | 70.5% | — |
| MMLU | 79.1% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: —, Step 3: 34.9 (#81)
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B | Step 3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1176 |
Multilingual Step 3 leads
Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 38.0 (#230), Step 3: 46.5 (#154)
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B | Step 3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1205 | 1327 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1222 | 1396 |
| LMArena Russian | 1228 | 1331 |
| LMArena German | — | 1371 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1271 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1372 |
Instruction Following Step 3 leads
Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 61.6 (#240), Step 3: 70.6 (#159)
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B | Step 3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1223 | 1332 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 58.7% | — |
Long Context Step 3 leads
Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 37.9 (#204), Step 3: 40.3 (#152)
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B | Step 3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1251 | 1326 |
Writing & Preference Step 3 leads
Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 41.8 (#235), Step 3: 54.5 (#146)
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B | Step 3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1230 | 1351 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1174 | 1322 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1222 | 1340 |
| LiveBench Language | 23.3% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Qwen2.5-Coder-32B better than Step 3?
Step 3 is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.9 to 32.9 on the Noometry Index.
Is Qwen2.5-Coder-32B or Step 3 better for coding?
Step 3 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 39.5 versus 22.4 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Qwen2.5-Coder-32B and Step 3 share?
12 benchmarks have published results for both models. Qwen2.5-Coder-32B has 31 scored results on Noometry and Step 3 has 17.