0 providers50 models

Model crosswalk

Side-by-side on price, capability and workload. Both columns use the cheapest provider for that model.

Qwen 2.5 Coder 32B Instruct
vs
Qwen 3 32B Instruct
Qwen 2.5 Coder 32B InstructA

Qwen 2.5 Coder 32B Instruct

32B params · 131K context · qwen

Cheapest providerdeepinfra
$/1M input$120000.00
$/1M output$250000.00
Qwen 3 32B InstructB

Qwen 3 32B Instruct

32B params · 131K context · qwen

Cheapest provideropenrouter
$/1M input$140000.00
$/1M output$550000.00
Specs and cheapest providers
SpecQwen 2.5 Coder 32B InstructQwen 3 32B Instruct
Parameters32B32B
Context window131K tokens131K tokens
Licenseqwenqwen
Released2024-11-122025-04-28
Cheapest provider
Providerdeepinfraopenrouter
Input / 1M tokens$120000.00🏆$140000.00
Output / 1M tokens$250000.00🏆$550000.00

Add a third model to compare

Benchmark comparison

No benchmark data available for either model yet.

Sample workload — 5M in + 2M out per month

using each model's cheapest provider
Qwen 2.5 Coder 32B Instruct
$1100000.00 /mo
Qwen 3 32B Instruct
$1800000.00 /mo

What changes at scale

Output tokens dominate cost above a 1:3 input/output ratio. Below 1:1, input dominates and cheaper-input providers win regardless of headline price.

1M in · 250K out$182500.00 · $277500.00
5M in · 2M out$1100000.00 · $1800000.00
20M in · 10M out$4900000.00 · $8300000.00
100M in · 60M out$27000000.00 · $47000000.00

Capability vs price

scatter
// scatter: benchmark × $/1M out
Calculate cost for your workload

Compare total monthly cost across providers for Qwen 2.5 Coder 32B Instruct and Qwen 3 32B Instruct using your own input/output token mix.

Open workload calculator →
Editor's take
Qwen 2.5 Coder 32B and Qwen 3 32B Instruct are both 32B dense models from Alibaba, but they serve different primary use cases. Qwen 2.5 Coder 32B is code-specialized: HumanEval pass@1 around 92%, strong on multi-language code generation, and trained with fill-in-the-middle to support infilling tasks. Qwen 3 32B is a general-purpose model with MMLU ~85–87 and broader instruction-following coverage, but its HumanEval scores (~85–88%) trail the dedicated coder variant. Pricing is comparable — both sit at $0.50–$1.00/M tokens — though Qwen 2.5 Coder 32B is sometimes cheaper on platforms targeting developer tooling. The practical question is workload composition. If your pipeline is >70% code generation, Qwen 2.5 Coder 32B's specialized training shows up in reduced error rates on function generation, test writing, and refactoring tasks. If the workload mixes code with substantial natural language reasoning, documentation, or multilingual content, Qwen 3 32B's broader training distribution is more consistent. **Where Qwen 2.5 Coder 32B wins:** autonomous coding agents, code review automation, language server backends, and any pure-code generation pipeline where HumanEval and MultiPL-E accuracy directly affect output quality. **Where Qwen 3 32B wins:** mixed code-and-text tasks, developer-facing chatbots that answer general questions alongside coding help, multilingual technical documentation, and long-context document analysis using its 128K window. Pick [Qwen 2.5 Coder 32B](/models/alibaba--qwen-2.5-coder-32b-instruct) for code-dominated workloads. Pick [Qwen 3 32B Instruct](/models/alibaba--qwen-3-32b-instruct) for generalist tasks where code is one capability among many.
Related comparisons
Full model details