Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct vs Qwen3 30B A3B

Qwen3 30B A3B leads Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 7.6 to 6.7, and Qwen3 30B A3B costs 2.0x less per output token ($0.50 vs $1.00 per million). Updated October 21, 2026; 28 benchmarks have a result for both.

Qwen2.5 Coder 32B InstructQwen
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$1.00
0
Qwen3 30B A3BQwen
Coding
No data
Overall
38.2
Output $/M
$0.50
28
vs boards won of 28 shared

Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct or Qwen3 30B A3B: which to pick

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

Pick Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct for work measured by LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run) or LMArena Text: coding, where it leads.

Shared results
28
Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct only
7
Qwen3 30B A3B only
24
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
Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct not benchmarked, Qwen3 30B A3B not benchmarked.
Widest category
Math, 18.7 points apart on average over 2 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
Epoch Capabilities Index: Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct 119.5 against Qwen3 30B A3B 137.3, 22.3 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct $1.00 against Qwen3 30B A3B $0.50 per million output tokens, 2.0x apart.
Context window
Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct takes 33K tokens, Qwen3 30B A3B 41K.

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
CategoryQwen2.5 Coder 32B InstructBarsQwen3 30B A3BTies
Coding03
Intelligence02
Reasoning05
Math02
Knowledge05
General011
All shared boards028
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index03
Coding benchmarks for Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct and Qwen3 30B A3B
BenchmarkQwen2.5 Coder 32B InstructQwen3 30B A3BLeader
Aider polyglot16.4%Not measuredOnly Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct measured
SWE-bench Verified47.0%Not measuredOnly Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)29.5%50.6%Qwen3 30B A3B
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured6.8%Only Qwen3 30B A3B measured
WeirdMLNot measured29.8%Only Qwen3 30B A3B measured
LMArena Text: coding12761337Qwen3 30B A3B
LMArena Text: software and IT12611340Qwen3 30B A3B
Neither model has a result on the other 32 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
Intelligence benchmarks for Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct and Qwen3 30B A3B
BenchmarkQwen2.5 Coder 32B InstructQwen3 30B A3BLeader
AA Intelligence Index6.77.6Qwen3 30B A3B
Epoch Capabilities Index119.5137.3Qwen3 30B A3B
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board, none shared
Agentic work benchmarks for Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct and Qwen3 30B A3B
BenchmarkQwen2.5 Coder 32B InstructQwen3 30B A3BLeader
τ²-Bench TelecomNot measured26.0%Only Qwen3 30B A3B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 40 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index05
Reasoning benchmarks for Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct and Qwen3 30B A3B
BenchmarkQwen2.5 Coder 32B InstructQwen3 30B A3BLeader
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)41.7%61.6%Qwen3 30B A3B
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)3.5%6.2%Qwen3 30B A3B
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)Not measured61.7%Only Qwen3 30B A3B measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts12511314Qwen3 30B A3B
LMArena Text: expert12211314Qwen3 30B A3B
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English12691329Qwen3 30B A3B
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 Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct and Qwen3 30B A3B
BenchmarkQwen2.5 Coder 32B InstructQwen3 30B A3BLeader
AA Math IndexNot measured72.3Only Qwen3 30B A3B measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured72.3%Only Qwen3 30B A3B measured
OTIS Mock AIMENot measured62.8%Only Qwen3 30B A3B measured
GSM8K93.0%Not measuredOnly Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: math12511355Qwen3 30B A3B
LMArena Text: mathematical work12431363Qwen3 30B A3B
Neither model has a result on the other 7 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index05
Knowledge benchmarks for Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct and Qwen3 30B A3B
BenchmarkQwen2.5 Coder 32B InstructQwen3 30B A3BLeader
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)63.5%77.7%Qwen3 30B A3B
MMLU79.1%Not measuredOnly Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct measured
AI2 Reasoning Challenge70.5%Not measuredOnly Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: science12211321Qwen3 30B A3B
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare11871318Qwen3 30B A3B
LMArena Text: legal and government12571314Qwen3 30B A3B
LMArena Text: business and finance12241309Qwen3 30B A3B
Neither model has a result on the other 11 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index5 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct and Qwen3 30B A3B
BenchmarkQwen2.5 Coder 32B InstructQwen3 30B A3BLeader
Design Arena: websitesNot measured955Only Qwen3 30B A3B measured
Design Arena: UI componentsNot measured946Only Qwen3 30B A3B measured
Design Arena: game devNot measured899Only Qwen3 30B A3B measured
Design Arena: data vizNot measured967Only Qwen3 30B A3B measured
Design Arena: all code categoriesNot measured942Only Qwen3 30B A3B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 4 boards here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index011
General benchmarks for Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct and Qwen3 30B A3B
BenchmarkQwen2.5 Coder 32B InstructQwen3 30B A3BLeader
IFBenchNot measured41.5%Only Qwen3 30B A3B measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)Not measured0.0%Only Qwen3 30B A3B measured
DTBenchNot measured60.3%Only Qwen3 30B A3B measured
LMCANot measured15.8%Only Qwen3 30B A3B measured
Fiction.LiveBenchNot measured40.6%Only Qwen3 30B A3B measured
Creative writing (Lech Mazur)Not measured75.3%Only Qwen3 30B A3B measured
HellaSwag83.0%Not measuredOnly Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct measured
WinoGrande80.8%Not measuredOnly Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct measured
LMArena Text12301317Qwen3 30B A3B
LMArena Text: instruction following12231283Qwen3 30B A3B
LMArena Text: creative writing11741271Qwen3 30B A3B
LMArena Text: English12481335Qwen3 30B A3B
LMArena Text: non-English12051295Qwen3 30B A3B
LMArena Text: Chinese12221347Qwen3 30B A3B
LMArena Text: GermanNot measured1307Only Qwen3 30B A3B measured
LMArena Text: JapaneseNot measured1254Only Qwen3 30B A3B measured
LMArena Text: KoreanNot measured1261Only Qwen3 30B A3B measured
LMArena Text: FrenchNot measured1352Only Qwen3 30B A3B measured
LMArena Text: SpanishNot measured1317Only Qwen3 30B A3B measured
LMArena Text: Russian12281291Qwen3 30B A3B
LMArena Text: PolishNot measured1299Only Qwen3 30B A3B measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn12221307Qwen3 30B A3B
LMArena Text: longer queries12511312Qwen3 30B A3B
LMArena Text: writing and language11911290Qwen3 30B A3B
LMArena Text: entertainment and media11501258Qwen3 30B A3B
Neither model has a result on the other 21 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct and Qwen3 30B A3B
BenchmarkQwen2.5 Coder 32B InstructQwen3 30B A3BLeader
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$0.0012Fits in one request
Qwen3 30B A3B$0.0004Fits in one request

Qwen3 30B A3B costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct$0.036Exceeds the context window
Qwen3 30B A3B$0.0075Exceeds the context window

Qwen3 30B A3B costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct$0.142Exceeds the context window
Qwen3 30B A3B$0.029Exceeds the context window

Qwen3 30B A3B 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 Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct and Qwen3 30B A3B
SpecificationQwen2.5 Coder 32B InstructQwen3 30B A3B
MakerQwenQwen
WeightsOpen weightsOpen weights
ReleasedNovember 11, 2024April 28, 2025
Context window33K41K
Input $/Mtok$0.66$0.12
Output $/Mtok$1.00$0.50
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it00
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct better than Qwen3 30B A3B for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct for work measured by LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run) or LMArena Text: coding, where it leads.

Which is cheaper, Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct or Qwen3 30B A3B?

Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct costs $0.66 per million input tokens and $1.00 per million output tokens; Qwen3 30B A3B costs $0.12 and $0.50. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct or Qwen3 30B A3B?

Qwen3 30B A3B, with 41K tokens against 33K.

How many benchmarks is the Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct vs Qwen3 30B A3B comparison based on?

28 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and Qwen3 30B A3B's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next