Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Mistral Nemo vs Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct

Updated October 21, 2026. 2 benchmarks have a result for both. Coding is ranked on the Vibe Coding Index; every other board is shown as published.

Mistral NemoMistral AI
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.15
0
Qwen2.5 Coder 32B InstructQwen
Coding
No data
Overall
6.7
Output $/M
$1.00
2
vs boards won of 2 shared

Decision reading

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

Mistral Nemo has the edge where output tokens cost 6.7x less, and where the context window is larger, 131K against 33K tokens.

Shared results
2
Mistral Nemo only
1
Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct only
33
Like-for-like categories
2 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
Mistral Nemo not benchmarked, Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct not benchmarked.
Widest category
Knowledge, 13.8 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
MMLU: Mistral Nemo 65.3% against Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct 79.1%, 13.8 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Mistral Nemo $0.15 against Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct $1.00 per million output tokens, 6.7x apart.
Context window
Mistral Nemo takes 131K 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
CategoryMistral NemoBarsQwen2.5 Coder 32B InstructTies
Intelligence01
Knowledge01
All shared boards02
CodingDirectional onlySix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index5 boards, none shared
Coding benchmarks for Mistral Nemo and Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct
BenchmarkMistral NemoQwen2.5 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)Not measured29.5%Only Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: codingNot measured1276Only Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: software and ITNot measured1261Only Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct measured
Neither model has a result on the other 33 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Intelligence benchmarks for Mistral Nemo and Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct
BenchmarkMistral NemoQwen2.5 Coder 32B InstructLeader
AA Intelligence IndexNot measured6.7Only Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct measured
Epoch Capabilities Index118.7119.5Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct
Agentic workNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Agentic work benchmarks for Mistral Nemo and Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct
BenchmarkMistral NemoQwen2.5 Coder 32B InstructLeader
Neither model has a result on 39 boards here
ReasoningDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index5 boards, none shared
Reasoning benchmarks for Mistral Nemo and Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct
BenchmarkMistral NemoQwen2.5 Coder 32B InstructLeader
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured41.7%Only Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured3.5%Only Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: hard promptsNot measured1251Only Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: expertNot measured1221Only Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts in EnglishNot measured1269Only Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct measured
Neither model has a result on the other 16 boards here
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index3 boards, none shared
Math benchmarks for Mistral Nemo and Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct
BenchmarkMistral NemoQwen2.5 Coder 32B InstructLeader
GSM8KNot measured93.0%Only Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: mathNot measured1251Only Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: mathematical workNot measured1243Only Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct measured
Neither model has a result on the other 10 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Knowledge benchmarks for Mistral Nemo and Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct
BenchmarkMistral NemoQwen2.5 Coder 32B InstructLeader
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured63.5%Only Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct measured
MMLU65.3%79.1%Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct
AI2 Reasoning ChallengeNot measured70.5%Only Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: scienceNot measured1221Only Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcareNot measured1187Only Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: legal and governmentNot measured1257Only Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: business and financeNot measured1224Only Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct measured
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 Mistral Nemo and Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct
BenchmarkMistral NemoQwen2.5 Coder 32B InstructLeader
Neither model has a result on 9 boards here
GeneralDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index14 boards, none shared
General benchmarks for Mistral Nemo and Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct
BenchmarkMistral NemoQwen2.5 Coder 32B InstructLeader
DTBench48.6%Not measuredOnly Mistral Nemo measured
HellaSwagNot measured83.0%Only Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct measured
WinoGrandeNot measured80.8%Only Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct measured
LMArena TextNot measured1230Only Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: instruction followingNot measured1223Only Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: creative writingNot measured1174Only Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: EnglishNot measured1248Only Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: non-EnglishNot measured1205Only Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: ChineseNot measured1222Only Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: RussianNot measured1228Only Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: multi-turnNot measured1222Only Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: longer queriesNot measured1251Only Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: writing and languageNot measured1191Only Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: entertainment and mediaNot measured1150Only Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct measured
Neither model has a result on the other 32 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for Mistral Nemo and Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct
BenchmarkMistral NemoQwen2.5 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

Mistral Nemo$0.0002Fits in one request
Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct$0.0012Fits in one request

Mistral Nemo costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Mistral Nemo$0.0080Fits in one request
Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct$0.036Exceeds the context window

Mistral Nemo costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Mistral Nemo$0.032Exceeds the context window
Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct$0.142Exceeds the context window

Mistral Nemo 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 Mistral Nemo and Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct
SpecificationMistral NemoQwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct
MakerMistral AIQwen
WeightsOpen weightsOpen weights
ReleasedJuly 19, 2024November 11, 2024
Context window131K33K
Input $/Mtok$0.15$0.66
Output $/Mtok$0.15$1.00
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it00
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Mistral Nemo better than Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Mistral Nemo has the edge where output tokens cost 6.7x less, and where the context window is larger, 131K against 33K tokens.

Which is cheaper, Mistral Nemo or Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct?

Mistral Nemo costs $0.15 per million input tokens and $0.15 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, Mistral Nemo or Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct?

Mistral Nemo, with 131K tokens against 33K.

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

2 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. Mistral Nemo'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