Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Nova Lite 1.0 vs Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct

Updated October 21, 2026. 28 benchmarks have a result for both. Coding is ranked on the Vibe Coding Index; every other board is shown as published.

Nova Lite 1.0Amazon
Coding
No data
Overall
6.7
Output $/M
$0.24
9
Qwen2.5 Coder 32B InstructQwen
Coding
No data
Overall
6.7
Output $/M
$1.00
18
vs boards won of 28 shared, 1 tied

Decision reading

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Nova Lite 1.0 has the edge where output tokens cost 4.2x less, and where the context window is larger, 300K against 33K tokens.

Shared results
28
Nova Lite 1.0 only
13
Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct only
7
Like-for-like categories
6 of 9

Shared results can support a head-to-head reading. Results only one model has describe coverage, not superiority.

Which one for your work

Each card is decided by one number both models carry. Where only one has it, the card says so and makes no call.

At a glance

Coding index
Nova Lite 1.0 not benchmarked, Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct not benchmarked.
Widest category
Coding, 7.4 points apart on average over 3 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run): Nova Lite 1.0 16.7% against Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct 29.5%, 12.8 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Nova Lite 1.0 $0.24 against Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct $1.00 per million output tokens, 4.2x apart.
Context window
Nova Lite 1.0 takes 300K tokens, Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct 33K.

Benchmark by benchmark

First the score: boards each model leads, per category, where both have a result. Then every board, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale, so compare the two in a row, not one row with another.

Boards won, where both have a result
CategoryNova Lite 1.0BarsQwen2.5 Coder 32B InstructTies
Coding03
Intelligence001 tie
Reasoning23
Math02
Knowledge24
General56
All shared boards9181 tie
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index03
Coding benchmarks for Nova Lite 1.0 and Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct
BenchmarkNova Lite 1.0Qwen2.5 Coder 32B InstructLeader
Aider polyglotNot measured16.4%Only Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct measured
SWE-bench VerifiedNot measured47.0%Only Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)16.7%29.5%Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)0.8%Not measuredOnly Nova Lite 1.0 measured
LMArena Text: coding12391276Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct
LMArena Text: software and IT12411261Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct
Neither model has a result on the other 32 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index00
Intelligence benchmarks for Nova Lite 1.0 and Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct
BenchmarkNova Lite 1.0Qwen2.5 Coder 32B InstructLeader
AA Intelligence Index6.76.7Tie
Epoch Capabilities IndexNot measured119.5Only Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct measured
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board, none shared
Agentic work benchmarks for Nova Lite 1.0 and Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct
BenchmarkNova Lite 1.0Qwen2.5 Coder 32B InstructLeader
τ²-Bench Telecom17.5%Not measuredOnly Nova Lite 1.0 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 38 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index23
Reasoning benchmarks for Nova Lite 1.0 and Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct
BenchmarkNova Lite 1.0Qwen2.5 Coder 32B InstructLeader
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)43.3%41.7%Nova Lite 1.0
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)4.3%3.5%Nova Lite 1.0
LMArena Text: hard prompts12201251Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct
LMArena Text: expert12011221Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English12261269Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct
Neither model has a result on the other 16 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
Math benchmarks for Nova Lite 1.0 and Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct
BenchmarkNova Lite 1.0Qwen2.5 Coder 32B InstructLeader
AA Math Index7.0Not measuredOnly Nova Lite 1.0 measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)7.0%Not measuredOnly Nova Lite 1.0 measured
GSM8KNot measured93.0%Only Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: math12271251Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct
LMArena Text: mathematical work12351243Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct
Neither model has a result on the other 8 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index24
Knowledge benchmarks for Nova Lite 1.0 and Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct
BenchmarkNova Lite 1.0Qwen2.5 Coder 32B InstructLeader
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)59.0%63.5%Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct
MMLU77.0%79.1%Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct
AI2 Reasoning ChallengeNot measured70.5%Only Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: science12321221Nova Lite 1.0
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare12131187Nova Lite 1.0
LMArena Text: legal and government12381257Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct
LMArena Text: business and finance12191224Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct
Neither model has a result on the other 10 boards here
Web designNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for Nova Lite 1.0 and Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct
BenchmarkNova Lite 1.0Qwen2.5 Coder 32B InstructLeader
Neither model has a result on 9 boards here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index56
General benchmarks for Nova Lite 1.0 and Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct
BenchmarkNova Lite 1.0Qwen2.5 Coder 32B InstructLeader
IFBench34.1%Not measuredOnly Nova Lite 1.0 measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)19.0%Not measuredOnly Nova Lite 1.0 measured
HellaSwagNot measured83.0%Only Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct measured
WinoGrandeNot measured80.8%Only Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct measured
LMArena Text12291230Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct
LMArena Text: instruction following12051223Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct
LMArena Text: creative writing11971174Nova Lite 1.0
LMArena Vision990Not measuredOnly Nova Lite 1.0 measured
LMArena Text: English12431248Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct
LMArena Text: non-English12081205Nova Lite 1.0
LMArena Text: Chinese12251222Nova Lite 1.0
LMArena Text: German1229Not measuredOnly Nova Lite 1.0 measured
LMArena Text: Japanese1153Not measuredOnly Nova Lite 1.0 measured
LMArena Text: Korean1153Not measuredOnly Nova Lite 1.0 measured
LMArena Text: French1238Not measuredOnly Nova Lite 1.0 measured
LMArena Text: Spanish1226Not measuredOnly Nova Lite 1.0 measured
LMArena Text: Russian12161228Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct
LMArena Text: multi-turn11991222Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct
LMArena Text: longer queries12341251Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct
LMArena Text: writing and language12111191Nova Lite 1.0
LMArena Text: entertainment and media11761150Nova Lite 1.0
LMArena Vision: English999Not measuredOnly Nova Lite 1.0 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 24 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for Nova Lite 1.0 and Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct
BenchmarkNova Lite 1.0Qwen2.5 Coder 32B InstructLeader
Neither model has a result on 5 boards here

What each workload costs

Three fixed token mixes at each model's listed price, so per-token rates become a bill.

Chat turn

1K input + 500 output tokens

Nova Lite 1.0$0.0002Fits in one request
Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct$0.0012Fits in one request

Nova Lite 1.0 costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Nova Lite 1.0$0.0037Fits in one request
Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct$0.036Exceeds the context window

Nova Lite 1.0 costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Nova Lite 1.0$0.014Fits in one request
Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct$0.142Exceeds the context window

Nova Lite 1.0 costs less

Listed OpenRouter rates, without cache or batch discounts. A workload that does not fit a model's context window would need splitting.

Specification differences

The leading value in a row is marked; a row with a missing value names no leader. Our two rows are marked in red.

Specifications of Nova Lite 1.0 and Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct
SpecificationAmazon Nova Lite 1.0Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct
MakerAmazonQwen
WeightsNo public weights listedOpen weights
ReleasedDecember 5, 2024November 11, 2024
Context window300K33K
Input $/Mtok$0.06$0.66
Output $/Mtok$0.24$1.00
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it00
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Nova Lite 1.0 better than Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Nova Lite 1.0 has the edge where output tokens cost 4.2x less, and where the context window is larger, 300K against 33K tokens.

Which is cheaper, Nova Lite 1.0 or Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct?

Nova Lite 1.0 costs $0.06 per million input tokens and $0.24 per million output tokens; Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct costs $0.66 and $1.00. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, Nova Lite 1.0 or Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct?

Nova Lite 1.0, with 300K tokens against 33K.

How many benchmarks is the Nova Lite 1.0 vs Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct comparison based on?

28 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. Nova Lite 1.0's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next