The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Beam 1.0 vs Qwen2.5 VL 32B Instruct

Beam 1.0 leads the LLM Stats Score 44.6 to 9.3.

Reflection AI · Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Beam 1.0 leads the overall LLM Stats Score 44.6 to 9.3, ranking #46 overall.

In the 1 individual benchmarks reported for both models, Beam 1.0 wins 1; this is a narrower head-to-head signal than the composite indexes.

Based on current LLM Stats indexes, shared benchmarks, pricing, and model metadata for 2026.

Choose Beam 1.0

  • overall performance matters — it scores 44.6 and ranks #46 on LLM Stats
  • your work emphasizes reasoning and coding — it leads those capability indexes
  • you value its reported benchmark strengths — it wins 1 of 1 exact shared results
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Oct 2026

Choose Qwen2.5 VL 32B Instruct

  • you are already invested in the Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team ecosystem

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Beam 1.0
Reflection AI
Qwen2.5 VL 32B Instruct
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
44.6
#46
9.3
#294
Reasoning
45.5
#37
8.0
#299
Coding
33.7
#39
12.3
#165
Agents
28.8
#53
-3.2
#204
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
1 of 1
0 of 1
Input price
$0.40 / M
— / M
Output price
$1.20 / M
— / M
Context window
1,048,576
—

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

2 shared
Index
Beam 1.0
Qwen2.5 VL 32B Instruct
Math
35.1#45
11.5#252
Vision
15.9#105
6.2#166
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

22 reported for Beam 1.0 · 28 for Qwen2.5 VL 32B Instruct

1 shared

Beam 1.0 outperforms in 1 benchmarks (GPQA), while Qwen2.5 VL 32B Instruct is better at 0 benchmarks.

Beam 1.0 significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Thu Oct 22 2026 • llm-stats.com

Human preference

Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores

Model Size

Parameter count comparison

467.8B diff

Beam 1.0 has 467.8B more parameters than Qwen2.5 VL 32B Instruct, making it 1396.4% larger.

Reflection AI
Beam 1.0
501.3Bparameters
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen2.5 VL 32B Instruct
33.5Bparameters
501.3B
Beam 1.0
33.5B
Qwen2.5 VL 32B Instruct

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Only Beam 1.0 specifies input context (1,048,576 tokens). Only Beam 1.0 specifies output context (131,072 tokens).

Reflection AI
Beam 1.0
Input1,048,576 tokens
Output131,072 tokens
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen2.5 VL 32B Instruct
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
Thu Oct 22 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

Qwen2.5 VL 32B Instruct supports multimodal inputs, whereas Beam 1.0 does not.

Qwen2.5 VL 32B Instruct can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.

Beam 1.0

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Qwen2.5 VL 32B Instruct

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Both models are licensed under Apache 2.0.

Both models share the same licensing terms, providing consistent usage rights.

Beam 1.0

Apache 2.0

Open weights

Qwen2.5 VL 32B Instruct

Apache 2.0

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Beam 1.0 was released on 2026-10-16, while Qwen2.5 VL 32B Instruct was released on 2025-02-28.

Beam 1.0 is 20 months newer than Qwen2.5 VL 32B Instruct.

Beam 1.0

Oct 16, 2026

3 days ago

1.6yr newer
Qwen2.5 VL 32B Instruct

Feb 28, 2025

1.6 years ago

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Beam 1.0 has a documented knowledge cutoff of 2026-06-30, while Qwen2.5 VL 32B Instruct's cutoff date is not specified.

We can confirm Beam 1.0's training data extends to 2026-06-30, but cannot make a direct comparison without Qwen2.5 VL 32B Instruct's cutoff date.

Beam 1.0

Jun 2026

Qwen2.5 VL 32B Instruct

—

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against Beam 1.0 and Qwen2.5 VL 32B Instruct side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Beam 1.0
✓ Preferred
Qwen2.5 VL 32B Instruct
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Beam 1.0 vs Qwen2.5 VL 32B Instruct.

Which is better, Beam 1.0 or Qwen2.5 VL 32B Instruct?

Beam 1.0 leads the LLM Stats Score 44.6 to 9.3. Beam 1.0 is made by Reflection AI and Qwen2.5 VL 32B Instruct is made by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their capability indexes, individual benchmarks, pricing, and limits above.

How does Beam 1.0 compare to Qwen2.5 VL 32B Instruct in benchmarks?

Beam 1.0 scores AIME 2026: 97.7%, GPQA: 90.6%, LiveCodeBench: 88.3%, SWE-Bench Verified: 81.6%, MCP Atlas: 80.8%. Qwen2.5 VL 32B Instruct scores DocVQA: 94.8%, Android Control Low_EM: 93.3%, HumanEval: 91.5%, ScreenSpot: 88.5%, MBPP: 84.0%.

What are the context window sizes for Beam 1.0 and Qwen2.5 VL 32B Instruct?

Beam 1.0 supports 1.0M tokens and Qwen2.5 VL 32B Instruct supports an unknown number of tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.

What are the main differences between Beam 1.0 and Qwen2.5 VL 32B Instruct?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (44.6 vs 9.3), multimodal support (no vs yes). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Beam 1.0 and Qwen2.5 VL 32B Instruct?

Beam 1.0 is developed by Reflection AI and Qwen2.5 VL 32B Instruct is developed by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team.

Related comparisons