Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GPT-4o (2024-05-13) vs Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct

GPT-4o (2024-05-13) leads Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 7.3 to 6.7, and Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct costs 15.0x less per output token ($1.00 vs $15.00 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 28 benchmarks have a result for both.

GPT-4o (2024-05-13)OpenAI
Coding
No data
Overall
27.1
Output $/M
$15.00
27
Qwen2.5 Coder 32B InstructQwen
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$1.00
1
vs boards won of 28 shared

GPT-4o (2024-05-13) or Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct: which to pick

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

Pick GPT-4o (2024-05-13) for a larger context window (128K against 33K tokens) and work measured by Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run), where it leads.

Shared results
28
GPT-4o (2024-05-13) only
16
Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct only
7
Like-for-like categories
6 of 9

Only benchmarks that tested both models count toward a pick; a result only one model has is shown but not compared.

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
GPT-4o (2024-05-13) not benchmarked, Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct not benchmarked.
Widest category
General, 13.0 points apart on average over 11 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
LMArena Text: entertainment and media: GPT-4o (2024-05-13) 1289 against Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct 1150, 23.2 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
GPT-4o (2024-05-13) $15.00 against Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct $1.00 per million output tokens, 15.0x apart.
Context window
GPT-4o (2024-05-13) takes 128K 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
CategoryGPT-4o (2024-05-13)BarsQwen2.5 Coder 32B InstructTies
Coding30
Intelligence10
Reasoning41
Math20
Knowledge60
General110
All shared boards271
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index30
Coding benchmarks for GPT-4o (2024-05-13) and Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct
BenchmarkGPT-4o (2024-05-13)Qwen2.5 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
AA Coding Index24.2Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)33.4%29.5%GPT-4o (2024-05-13)
LMArena Text: coding12971276GPT-4o (2024-05-13)
LMArena Text: software and IT12971261GPT-4o (2024-05-13)
Neither model has a result on the other 37 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Intelligence benchmarks for GPT-4o (2024-05-13) and Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct
BenchmarkGPT-4o (2024-05-13)Qwen2.5 Coder 32B InstructLeader
AA Intelligence Index7.36.7GPT-4o (2024-05-13)
Epoch Capabilities IndexNot measured119.5Only Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct measured
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards, none shared
Agentic work benchmarks for GPT-4o (2024-05-13) and Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct
BenchmarkGPT-4o (2024-05-13)Qwen2.5 Coder 32B InstructLeader
METR time horizons40.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
BALROG32.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
Neither model has a result on the other 40 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index41
Reasoning benchmarks for GPT-4o (2024-05-13) and Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct
BenchmarkGPT-4o (2024-05-13)Qwen2.5 Coder 32B InstructLeader
GPQA Diamond50.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)52.6%41.7%GPT-4o (2024-05-13)
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)1.8%3.5%Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)48.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts12811251GPT-4o (2024-05-13)
LMArena Text: expert12501221GPT-4o (2024-05-13)
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English12931269GPT-4o (2024-05-13)
Neither model has a result on the other 16 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
Math benchmarks for GPT-4o (2024-05-13) and Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct
BenchmarkGPT-4o (2024-05-13)Qwen2.5 Coder 32B InstructLeader
OTIS Mock AIME6.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
MATH level 551.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
GSM8KNot measured93.0%Only Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: math12841251GPT-4o (2024-05-13)
LMArena Text: mathematical work12841243GPT-4o (2024-05-13)
Neither model has a result on the other 9 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index60
Knowledge benchmarks for GPT-4o (2024-05-13) and Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct
BenchmarkGPT-4o (2024-05-13)Qwen2.5 Coder 32B InstructLeader
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)74.0%63.5%GPT-4o (2024-05-13)
MMLU84.2%79.1%GPT-4o (2024-05-13)
AI2 Reasoning ChallengeNot measured70.5%Only Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: science12951221GPT-4o (2024-05-13)
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare12781187GPT-4o (2024-05-13)
LMArena Text: legal and government13141257GPT-4o (2024-05-13)
LMArena Text: business and finance12621224GPT-4o (2024-05-13)
Neither model has a result on the other 13 boards here
Web designNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for GPT-4o (2024-05-13) and Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct
BenchmarkGPT-4o (2024-05-13)Qwen2.5 Coder 32B InstructLeader
Neither model has a result on 9 boards here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index110
General benchmarks for GPT-4o (2024-05-13) and Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct
BenchmarkGPT-4o (2024-05-13)Qwen2.5 Coder 32B InstructLeader
HellaSwagNot measured83.0%Only Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct measured
WinoGrandeNot measured80.8%Only Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct measured
LMArena Text13001230GPT-4o (2024-05-13)
LMArena Text: instruction following12781223GPT-4o (2024-05-13)
LMArena Text: creative writing12911174GPT-4o (2024-05-13)
LMArena Vision1137Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
LMArena Text: English13121248GPT-4o (2024-05-13)
LMArena Text: non-English12831205GPT-4o (2024-05-13)
LMArena Text: Chinese12771222GPT-4o (2024-05-13)
LMArena Text: German1283Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
LMArena Text: Japanese1257Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
LMArena Text: Korean1234Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
LMArena Text: French1304Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
LMArena Text: Spanish1292Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
LMArena Text: Russian12851228GPT-4o (2024-05-13)
LMArena Text: Polish1365Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn13021222GPT-4o (2024-05-13)
LMArena Text: longer queries12881251GPT-4o (2024-05-13)
LMArena Text: writing and language12981191GPT-4o (2024-05-13)
LMArena Text: entertainment and media12891150GPT-4o (2024-05-13)
LMArena Vision: English1147Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
LMArena Vision: Chinese1132Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
Neither model has a result on the other 26 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for GPT-4o (2024-05-13) and Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct
BenchmarkGPT-4o (2024-05-13)Qwen2.5 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

GPT-4o (2024-05-13)$0.013Fits in one request
Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct$0.0012Fits in one request

Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GPT-4o (2024-05-13)$0.295Fits in one request
Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct$0.036Exceeds the context window

Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GPT-4o (2024-05-13)$1.15Exceeds the context window
Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct$0.142Exceeds the context window

Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct 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 GPT-4o (2024-05-13) and Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct
SpecificationOpenAI GPT-4o (2024-05-13)Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct
MakerOpenAIQwen
WeightsNo public weights listedOpen weights
ReleasedMay 13, 2024November 11, 2024
Context window128K33K
Input $/Mtok$5.00$0.66
Output $/Mtok$15.00$1.00
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it00
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GPT-4o (2024-05-13) better than Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick GPT-4o (2024-05-13) for a larger context window (128K against 33K tokens) and work measured by Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run), where it leads.

Which is cheaper, GPT-4o (2024-05-13) or Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct?

GPT-4o (2024-05-13) costs $5.00 per million input tokens and $15.00 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, GPT-4o (2024-05-13) or Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct?

GPT-4o (2024-05-13), with 128K tokens against 33K.

How many benchmarks is the GPT-4o (2024-05-13) vs Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct comparison based on?

28 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. GPT-4o (2024-05-13)'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