Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Muse Wonder vs Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct

Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct costs 20.0x less per output token than Muse Wonder ($1.00 vs $20.00 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 24 benchmarks have a result for both.

Muse WonderMeta
Coding
71.9
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$20.00
24
Qwen2.5 Coder 32B InstructQwen
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$1.00
0
vs boards won of 24 shared

Muse Wonder or Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct: which to pick

Only Muse Wonder has a coding score, 71.9 on the Vibe Coding Index; Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct for output tokens 20.0x cheaper ($1.00 vs $20.00 per million).

Shared results
24
Muse Wonder only
36
Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct only
11
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
Muse Wonder 71.9 from 3 benchmarks, Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct not benchmarked.
Widest category
Intelligence, 53.0 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
LMArena Text: entertainment and media: Muse Wonder 1482 against Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct 1150, 55.2 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Muse Wonder $20.00 against Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct $1.00 per million output tokens, 20.0x apart.
Context window
Muse Wonder takes 1.05M 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
CategoryMuse WonderBarsQwen2.5 Coder 32B InstructTies
Coding20
Intelligence10
Reasoning40
Math20
Knowledge40
General110
All shared boards240
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index20
Coding benchmarks for Muse Wonder and Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct
BenchmarkMuse WonderQwen2.5 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
LMArena WebDev1652Not measuredOnly Muse Wonder measured
Terminal-Bench 4 (Vals AI)49.5%Not measuredOnly Muse Wonder measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)83.1%Not measuredOnly Muse Wonder measured
Code migration (Vals AI)62.5%Not measuredOnly Muse Wonder measured
IOI (Vals AI)66.9%Not measuredOnly Muse Wonder measured
SWE-bench Multimodal (Vals AI)45.6%Not measuredOnly Muse Wonder measured
Vibe Code Bench 1-100 (Vals AI)26.6%Not measuredOnly Muse Wonder measured
CyberBench (Vals AI)80.4%Not measuredOnly Muse Wonder measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured29.5%Only Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct measured
SciCode60.3%Not measuredOnly Muse Wonder measured
LMArena Text: coding15221276Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: software and IT15151261Muse Wonder
LMArena WebDev: React1641Not measuredOnly Muse Wonder measured
LMArena WebDev: HTML1694Not measuredOnly Muse Wonder measured
Neither model has a result on the other 23 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Intelligence benchmarks for Muse Wonder and Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct
BenchmarkMuse WonderQwen2.5 Coder 32B InstructLeader
AA Intelligence IndexNot measured6.7Only Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct measured
Epoch Capabilities Index161.8119.5Muse Wonder
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index11 boards, none shared
Agentic work benchmarks for Muse Wonder and Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct
BenchmarkMuse WonderQwen2.5 Coder 32B InstructLeader
Design Arena: spreadsheets1243Not measuredOnly Muse Wonder measured
Finance Agent (Vals AI)56.6%Not measuredOnly Muse Wonder measured
Tax Agent Bench (Vals AI)36.3%Not measuredOnly Muse Wonder measured
Legal Research Bench (Vals AI)50.5%Not measuredOnly Muse Wonder measured
Harvey's Legal Agent Benchmark (Vals AI)23.8%Not measuredOnly Muse Wonder measured
Excel Modeling Benchmark (Vals AI)67.1%Not measuredOnly Muse Wonder measured
BioMysteryBench (Vals AI)67.0%Not measuredOnly Muse Wonder measured
Terminal-Bench-Science (Vals AI)22.9%Not measuredOnly Muse Wonder measured
Vals Science Index39.1%Not measuredOnly Muse Wonder measured
CUA-bench (Vals AI)7.2%Not measuredOnly Muse Wonder measured
Vending-Bench 2$9,432Not measuredOnly Muse Wonder measured
Neither model has a result on the other 30 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index40
Reasoning benchmarks for Muse Wonder and Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct
BenchmarkMuse WonderQwen2.5 Coder 32B InstructLeader
MysteryMechanism (Vals AI)27.5%Not measuredOnly Muse Wonder measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured41.7%Only Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)50.1%3.5%Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: hard prompts15061251Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: expert15131221Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English15061269Muse Wonder
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 Muse Wonder and Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct
BenchmarkMuse WonderQwen2.5 Coder 32B InstructLeader
ProofBench84.0%Not measuredOnly Muse Wonder measured
GSM8KNot measured93.0%Only Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: math14861251Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: mathematical work15141243Muse Wonder
Neither model has a result on the other 9 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index40
Knowledge benchmarks for Muse Wonder and Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct
BenchmarkMuse WonderQwen2.5 Coder 32B InstructLeader
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured63.5%Only Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct measured
MMLUNot measured79.1%Only Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct measured
AI2 Reasoning ChallengeNot measured70.5%Only Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: science15061221Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare15121187Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: legal and government15051257Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: business and finance14831224Muse Wonder
Neither model has a result on the other 11 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index6 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for Muse Wonder and Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct
BenchmarkMuse WonderQwen2.5 Coder 32B InstructLeader
Design Arena: websites1362Not measuredOnly Muse Wonder measured
Design Arena: UI components1379Not measuredOnly Muse Wonder measured
Design Arena: game dev1376Not measuredOnly Muse Wonder measured
Design Arena: data viz1317Not measuredOnly Muse Wonder measured
Design Arena: 3D1427Not measuredOnly Muse Wonder measured
Design Arena: all code categories1371Not measuredOnly Muse Wonder measured
Neither model has a result on the other 3 boards here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index110
General benchmarks for Muse Wonder and Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct
BenchmarkMuse WonderQwen2.5 Coder 32B InstructLeader
Vals Index64.9%Not measuredOnly Muse Wonder measured
Public Benefits Bench (Vals AI)70.2%Not measuredOnly Muse Wonder measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)80.7%Not measuredOnly Muse Wonder measured
DTBench95.2%Not measuredOnly Muse Wonder measured
LMCA56.8%Not measuredOnly Muse Wonder measured
HellaSwagNot measured83.0%Only Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct measured
WinoGrandeNot measured80.8%Only Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct measured
LMArena Text15021230Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: instruction following14911223Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: creative writing14911174Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: English15071248Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: non-English14921205Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: Chinese15371222Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: French1523Not measuredOnly Muse Wonder measured
LMArena Text: Russian15221228Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: multi-turn15101222Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: longer queries14931251Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: writing and language14961191Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: entertainment and media14821150Muse Wonder
Neither model has a result on the other 27 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for Muse Wonder and Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct
BenchmarkMuse WonderQwen2.5 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

Muse Wonder$0.014Fits 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

Muse Wonder$0.260Fits 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

Muse Wonder$1.00Fits in one request
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 Muse Wonder and Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct
SpecificationMeta Muse WonderQwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct
MakerMetaQwen
WeightsNo public weights listedOpen weights
ReleasedOctober 12, 2026November 11, 2024
Context window1.05M33K
Input $/Mtok$4.00$0.66
Output $/Mtok$20.00$1.00
Coding index71.9Not benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it30
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Muse Wonder better than Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct for coding?

Only Muse Wonder has a coding score, 71.9 on the Vibe Coding Index; Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct for output tokens 20.0x cheaper ($1.00 vs $20.00 per million).

Which is cheaper, Muse Wonder or Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct?

Muse Wonder costs $4.00 per million input tokens and $20.00 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, Muse Wonder or Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct?

Muse Wonder, with 1.05M tokens against 33K.

How many benchmarks is the Muse Wonder vs Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct comparison based on?

24 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. Muse Wonder's coding index rests on 3 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