o3 Pro vs Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct
Updated October 21, 2026. 4 benchmarks have a result for both. Coding is ranked on the Vibe Coding Index; every other board is shown as published.
Decision reading
Pick o3 Pro for coding: it scores 84.9 on the Vibe Coding Index against 30.5 for Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct, though on 1 benchmark against 2.
Pick Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct when output tokens cost 80.0x less.
- Shared results
- 4
- o3 Pro only
- 7
- Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct only
- 31
- Like-for-like categories
- 3 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.
Coding
Vibe Coding Index, four public coding benchmarks
o3 Pro
o3 Pro scores 84.9 against 30.5.
1 and 2 benchmarks behind the scores
Intelligence
AA Intelligence Index
o3 Pro
o3 Pro leads, 21.9 against 6.7.
Same board, both measured
Long documents
Listed context window
o3 Pro
o3 Pro takes 200K tokens against 33K.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct
o3 Pro $0.060, Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct $0.0012 per turn.
List prices
At a glance
- Coding index
- o3 Pro 84.9 from 1 benchmark, Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct 30.5 from 2 benchmarks.
- Widest category
- Coding, 68.5 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
- Widest single gap
- Aider polyglot: o3 Pro 84.9% against Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct 16.4%, 68.5 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
- Output price
- o3 Pro $80.00 against Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct $1.00 per million output tokens, 80.0x apart.
- Context window
- o3 Pro takes 200K 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.
| Category | o3 Pro | Bars | Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct | Ties |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | 1 | 0 | ||
| Intelligence | 2 | 0 | ||
| Reasoning | 1 | 0 | ||
| All shared boards | 4 | 0 |
CodingLike-for-likeFour of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index10
| Benchmark | o3 Pro | Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aider polyglot | 84.9% | 16.4% | o3 Pro |
| SWE-bench Verified | Not measured | 47.0% | Only Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct measured |
| LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 29.5% | Only Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct measured |
| WeirdML | 58.2% | Not measured | Only o3 Pro measured |
| LMArena Text: coding | Not measured | 1276 | Only Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct measured |
| LMArena Text: software and IT | Not measured | 1261 | Only Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 32 boards here | |||
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
| Benchmark | o3 Pro | Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | 21.9 | 6.7 | o3 Pro |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 147.3 | 119.5 | o3 Pro |
Agentic workNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | o3 Pro | Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Neither model has a result on 39 boards here | |||
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
| Benchmark | o3 Pro | Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) | 84.5% | 41.7% | o3 Pro |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 3.5% | Only Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct measured |
| ARC-AGI | 59.3% | Not measured | Only o3 Pro measured |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 4.9% | Not measured | Only o3 Pro measured |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts | Not measured | 1251 | Only Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct measured |
| LMArena Text: expert | Not measured | 1221 | Only Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct measured |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts in English | Not measured | 1269 | Only Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 14 boards here | |||
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index3 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | o3 Pro | Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| GSM8K | Not measured | 93.0% | Only Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct measured |
| LMArena Text: math | Not measured | 1251 | Only Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct measured |
| LMArena Text: mathematical work | Not measured | 1243 | Only Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 10 boards here | |||
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index7 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | o3 Pro | Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 63.5% | Only Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct measured |
| MMLU | Not measured | 79.1% | Only Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct measured |
| AI2 Reasoning Challenge | Not measured | 70.5% | Only Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct measured |
| LMArena Text: science | Not measured | 1221 | Only Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct measured |
| LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare | Not measured | 1187 | Only Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct measured |
| LMArena Text: legal and government | Not measured | 1257 | Only Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct measured |
| LMArena Text: business and finance | Not measured | 1224 | Only 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
| Benchmark | o3 Pro | Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Neither model has a result on 9 boards here | |||
GeneralDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index17 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | o3 Pro | Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| DTBench | 86.9% | Not measured | Only o3 Pro measured |
| LMCA | 38.5% | Not measured | Only o3 Pro measured |
| Fiction.LiveBench | 97.2% | Not measured | Only o3 Pro measured |
| Creative writing (Lech Mazur) | 84.4% | Not measured | Only o3 Pro measured |
| HellaSwag | Not measured | 83.0% | Only Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct measured |
| WinoGrande | Not measured | 80.8% | Only Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct measured |
| LMArena Text | Not measured | 1230 | Only Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct measured |
| LMArena Text: instruction following | Not measured | 1223 | Only Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct measured |
| LMArena Text: creative writing | Not measured | 1174 | Only Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct measured |
| LMArena Text: English | Not measured | 1248 | Only Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct measured |
| LMArena Text: non-English | Not measured | 1205 | Only Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct measured |
| LMArena Text: Chinese | Not measured | 1222 | Only Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct measured |
| LMArena Text: Russian | Not measured | 1228 | Only Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct measured |
| LMArena Text: multi-turn | Not measured | 1222 | Only Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct measured |
| LMArena Text: longer queries | Not measured | 1251 | Only Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct measured |
| LMArena Text: writing and language | Not measured | 1191 | Only Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct measured |
| LMArena Text: entertainment and media | Not measured | 1150 | Only Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 29 boards here | |||
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | o3 Pro | Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| 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
Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct costs less
Repository review
50K input + 3K output tokens
Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct costs less
Agent loop
200K input + 10K output tokens
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.
| Specification | OpenAI o3 Pro | Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | OpenAI | Qwen |
| Weights | No public weights listed | Open weights |
| Released | June 10, 2025 | November 11, 2024 |
| Context window | 200K | 33K |
| Input $/Mtok | $20.00 | $0.66 |
| Output $/Mtok | $80.00 | $1.00 |
| Coding index | 84.9 | 30.5 |
| Independent measurements behind it | 1 | 2 |
| Cost per solved task | Not computable | Not computable |
| Source | OpenRouter listing | OpenRouter listing |
Questions
Is o3 Pro better than Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct for coding?
Pick o3 Pro for coding: it scores 84.9 on the Vibe Coding Index against 30.5 for Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct, though on 1 benchmark against 2. Pick Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct when output tokens cost 80.0x less.
Which is cheaper, o3 Pro or Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct?
o3 Pro costs $20.00 per million input tokens and $80.00 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, o3 Pro or Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct?
o3 Pro, with 200K tokens against 33K.
How many benchmarks is the o3 Pro vs Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct comparison based on?
4 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. o3 Pro's coding index rests on 1 independent benchmark and Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct's on 2. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.