The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Qwen2.5 14B Instruct vs Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct

Qwen2.5 14B Instruct and Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct are closely matched at 3.8 and 2.0 on the LLM Stats Score.

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

Which is better?

Qwen2.5 14B Instruct and Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct are closely matched on the overall LLM Stats Score at 3.8 and 2.0.

In the 10 individual benchmarks reported for both models, Qwen2.5 14B Instruct wins 6; 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 Qwen2.5 14B Instruct

  • you value its reported benchmark strengths — it wins 6 of 10 exact shared results

Choose Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct

  • you want predictable pricing at $0.09/M input and $0.09/M output

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Core performance indexes
3.8
#322
2.0
#333
3.3
#317
2.0
#323
3.9
#228
9.9
#180
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
6 of 10
4 of 10
Input price
— / M
$0.09 / M
Output price
— / M
$0.09 / M
Context window
—
128,000

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

3 shared
Index
Qwen2.5 14B Instruct
Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct
10.6#256
4.9#283
5.0#174
1.2#193
5.7#158
-0.4#190
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

16 reported for Qwen2.5 14B Instruct · 15 for Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct

10 shared

Qwen2.5 14B Instruct outperforms in 6 benchmarks (GSM8k, MATH, MMLU, MMLU-Pro, MMLU-Redux, TruthfulQA), while Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct is better at 4 benchmarks (ARC-C, HumanEval, MBPP, TheoremQA).

Qwen2.5 14B Instruct has a slight edge in benchmark performance.

Fri Oct 16 2026 • llm-stats.com

Human preference

Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores

Model Size

Parameter count comparison

17.3B diff

Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct has 17.3B more parameters than Qwen2.5 14B Instruct, making it 117.7% larger.

Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen2.5 14B Instruct
14.7Bparameters
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct
32.0Bparameters
14.7B
Qwen2.5 14B Instruct
32.0B
Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Only Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct specifies input context (128,000 tokens). Only Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct specifies output context (128,000 tokens).

Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen2.5 14B Instruct
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct
Input128,000 tokens
Output128,000 tokens
Fri Oct 16 2026 • llm-stats.com

License

Usage and distribution terms

Both models are licensed under Apache 2.0.

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

Qwen2.5 14B Instruct

Apache 2.0

Open weights

Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct

Apache 2.0

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Both models were released on 2024-09-19.

They likely represent similar generations of model development.

Qwen2.5 14B Instruct

Sep 19, 2024

2.1 years ago

Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct

Sep 19, 2024

2.1 years ago

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Neither model specifies a knowledge cutoff date.

Unable to compare the recency of their training data.

No cutoff dates available

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against Qwen2.5 14B Instruct and Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Qwen2.5 14B Instruct
✓ Preferred
Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Qwen2.5 14B Instruct vs Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct.

Which is better, Qwen2.5 14B Instruct or Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct?

Qwen2.5 14B Instruct and Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct are closely matched on the LLM Stats Score at 3.8 and 2.0. Qwen2.5 14B Instruct is made by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team and Qwen2.5-Coder 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 Qwen2.5 14B Instruct compare to Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct in benchmarks?

Qwen2.5 14B Instruct scores GSM8k: 94.8%, HumanEval: 83.5%, MBPP: 82.0%, MATH: 80.0%, MMLU-Redux: 80.0%. Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct scores HumanEval: 92.7%, GSM8k: 91.1%, MBPP: 90.2%, HellaSwag: 83.0%, Winogrande: 80.8%.

What are the context window sizes for Qwen2.5 14B Instruct and Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct?

Qwen2.5 14B Instruct supports an unknown number of tokens and Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct supports 128K tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.

What are the main differences between Qwen2.5 14B Instruct and Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (3.8 vs 2.0). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.