CompareLLM
CompareLLM.ai
Live
LeaderboardModelsCompareStacksBest ofGuidesNewsMethod
…
CompareLLM
CompareLLM.ai
Precision Benchmarks

Programmatic, dated AI model benchmarks, head-to-head comparisons, and Stack Engine presets.

Daily ingest · 06:00 UTC

Analytics & Benchmarks

  • AI Model Leaderboard
  • Head-to-Head Compare Hub
  • Models Directory
  • Stack Engine Presets
  • Frontier Models
  • Open Weights Catalog

Guides & Intent Lists

  • Best LLM Lists (2026)
  • Best Coding LLM
  • Best Cheap LLM
  • Fastest Low-Latency LLM
  • Claude vs GPT Benchmark
  • What is Elo?
  • Methodology Guides
  • News & Dispatches

Transparency & API

  • Evaluation Methodology
  • Benchmark Changelog
  • Public JSON API
  • llms.txt Specification
  • Privacy Policy
  • Sign In / Account

© 2026 CompareLLM. Public benchmark data aggregated from Arena Elo, LiveBench, SWE-bench & OpenRouter.

Every score has a dated snapshot.

  1. Home
  2. Comparisons
  3. Codestral 25.01 vs Qwen 2.5 Coder 32B

Pairwise benchmark snapshot · Aug 1, 2026

Codestral 25.01 vs Qwen 2.5 Coder 32B benchmark

This page compares Codestral 25.01 (Mistral) and Qwen 2.5 Coder 32B (Alibaba) using the latest snapshots we have as of Aug 1, 2026. On preference Elo, Qwen 2.5 Coder 32B is ahead by 105 points (1,425 vs 1,320; seed-bootstrap (Aug 1, 2026)). On SWE-bench coding, Qwen 2.5 Coder 32B resolves 65.2% versus 51.8% (seed-bootstrap (Aug 1, 2026)). Codestral 25.01 streams faster (148 tok/s) while Qwen 2.5 Coder 32B is the cheaper output token ($0.72/1M). Codestral 25.01 has the larger context window (256k tokens). Every cell below is a dated snapshot from a named public source — we do not invent missing scores, and we do not run SWE-bench ourselves.

Quick answer

Codestral 25.01 vs Qwen 2.5 Coder 32B is a dated snapshot, not a lab score. Qwen 2.5 Coder 32B leads preference Elo (1,425 vs 1,320). Qwen 2.5 Coder 32B leads SWE-bench coding. Qwen 2.5 Coder 32B is the cheaper output token. Elo is crowd preference, not an exam. Pick the column that matches the job.
Share Analysis:
WhatsAppTelegramX / PostLinkedInReddit

Mistral

Codestral 25.01

Mistral code-specialist model.

Elo 1,320$0.9/1M out

Alibaba

Qwen 2.5 Coder 32B

Alibaba dedicated open-weight code generation model with near-frontier SWE-bench Verified coding capability.

Elo 1,425$0.72/1M out

Swap or Add Any Model to this Matchup

Instant pairwise benchmark recalculation across 400+ LLMs

Model A
Model B
Quick vs:vs Claude Opus 4.5vs Claude Opus 4.6vs Claude Sonnet 4.5vs Claude 3.7 Sonnet

Interactive Comparison Diagram

Matchup Breakdown

Tug-of-War Matchup Matrix

Category wins across intelligence, speed, and pricing efficiency.

Codestral 25.01 (3)vsQwen 2.5 Coder 32B (7)
Codestral 25.01: 3W (30%)Overall: Qwen 2.5 Coder 32BQwen 2.5 Coder 32B: 7W (70%)
← Codestral 25.01Qwen 2.5 Coder 32B →
Qwen 2.5 Coder 32B (5/5)

Intelligence & Reasoning

Preference Elo, Coding proficiency, SWE-bench & LiveBench accuracy

Preference Elo
1,320vs1,425
Coding Elo
1,402vs1,495
SWE-bench
51.8%vs65.2%
LiveBench
54%vs64.8%
GPQA Diamond
58.4%vs74%
Codestral 25.01: 0WQwen 2.5 Coder 32B: 5W
Codestral 25.01 (2/2)

Speed & Latency

Generation throughput and time to first token responsiveness

Output speed
148 tok/svs110 tok/s
Time to first token
150 msvs180 ms
Codestral 25.01: 2WQwen 2.5 Coder 32B: 0W
Qwen 2.5 Coder 32B (2/3)

Pricing & Capacity

Cost per million tokens and max context window length

Output price
$0.9/1Mvs$0.72/1M
Input price
$0.3/1Mvs$0.18/1M
Context window
256kvs131k
Codestral 25.01: 1WQwen 2.5 Coder 32B: 2W
Capability Matchup Radar

Multi-Dimensional Capability Radar

Each spoke is a skill. Farther from the center is better (0–100th percentile). Tap any dot to inspect details.

Tap any node to inspect
Percentile 0–100
Dimensional AdvantageQwen 2.5 Coder 32B 4/6
Preference Elo

Qwen 2.5 Coder 32B

105 pts advantage

Throughput Speed

Codestral 25.01

38 tok/s faster

Price Efficiency

Qwen 2.5 Coder 32B

$0.18/1M cheaper

Full Benchmark Score Matrix

—
Elo
High is better
1,320
EloHigh is better
1,425+8%
Code Elo
High is better
1,402
Code EloHigh is better
1,495+7%
LiveBench
High is better
54%
LiveBenchHigh is better
64.8%+20%
SWE-bench
High is better
51.8%
SWE-benchHigh is better
65.2%+26%
GPQA
High is better
58.4%
GPQAHigh is better
74%+27%
TTFT
Low is better
+20%150 ms
TTFTLow is better
180 ms
Speed
High is better
+35%148 tok/s
SpeedHigh is better
110 tok/s
In $
Low is better
$0.3/1M
In $Low is better
$0.18/1M+67%
Out $
Low is better
$0.9/1M
Out $Low is better
$0.72/1M+25%
Context
High is better
+95%256k
ContextHigh is better
131k
Interactive Simulator

Workload Cost & Savings Calculator

Simulate monthly production API costs based on published $/1M tokens.

Save up to 29% with Qwen 2.5 Coder 32B
Monthly Volume50M tokens/mo
Quick Presets:
Token Ratio (In vs Out)70% In / 30% Out
RAG / Search (10% out)Coding / Chat (50% out)
Codestral 25.01$24.00 / mo
In: $10.50Out: $13.50
Qwen 2.5 Coder 32B$17.10 / mo
In: $6.30Out: $10.80
Estimated Cost Delta

Qwen 2.5 Coder 32B is estimated to save $6.90/month ($83/year).

Based on 50M tokens (30% gen)

Key Selection Recommendations

  • 1
    Qwen 2.5 Coder 32B:Pick Qwen 2.5 Coder 32B when repo-level coding accuracy is the constraint.
  • 2
    Codestral 25.01:Pick Codestral 25.01 when time-to-first-token matters more than peak Elo.
  • 3
    Qwen 2.5 Coder 32B:Pick Qwen 2.5 Coder 32B as the default general assistant.

Recommended Workload Routing

Repo / coding agentsQwen 2.5 Coder 32B

Higher SWE-bench (65.2%).

High-volume chatQwen 2.5 Coder 32B

Lower output list price ($0.72/1M).

Voice / low-latency UICodestral 25.01

Lower TTFT (150 ms).

Long-document RAGCodestral 25.01

Larger window (256k).

Screenshots / visionQwen 2.5 Coder 32B

Qwen 2.5 Coder 32B is the side marked multimodal in the catalog.

Target WorkloadRecommended PickEvaluation Rationale
Repo / coding agentsQwen 2.5 Coder 32BHigher SWE-bench (65.2%).
High-volume chatQwen 2.5 Coder 32BLower output list price ($0.72/1M).
Voice / low-latency UICodestral 25.01Lower TTFT (150 ms).
Long-document RAGCodestral 25.01Larger window (256k).
Screenshots / visionQwen 2.5 Coder 32BQwen 2.5 Coder 32B is the side marked multimodal in the catalog.

Related Editorial Dispatches & Benchmark Notes

View all news
launchJan 14, 2025

Codestral 25.01: Mistral’s code-specialist row

Jan 2025 code model. Still a valid cheap-coding compare. Not a chatbot.

Community Sentiment

Cast Your Matchup Vote

0 total votes

Community Discussions (0)

Sign in to cast your verified vote, bookmark models, and participate in benchmark discussions.Sign In to Post

No comments posted on this matchup yet. Be the first to share an evaluation note!

Share card

The real PNG is generated at /compare/codestral-25-vs-qwen-2-5-coder-32b/opengraph-image for crawlers.

PNG

CompareLLM Matrix

Verified head-to-head card

LIVE
VS
Mistral

Codestral 25.01

Elo 1,320
LiveBench54%
SWE-bench51.8%
Speed148 tok/s
Output cost$0.9/1M
Alibaba

Qwen 2.5 Coder 32B

Elo 1,425
LiveBench64.8%
SWE-bench65.2%
Speed110 tok/s
Output cost$0.72/1M

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is better overall, Codestral 25.01 or Qwen 2.5 Coder 32B?
Qwen 2.5 Coder 32B has the higher preference Elo in our latest snapshot (1,425). “Better” still depends on coding, price, and latency — see the table.
Which is better at coding, Codestral 25.01 or Qwen 2.5 Coder 32B?
Qwen 2.5 Coder 32B leads SWE-bench at 65.2% vs 51.8%. SWE-bench is one harness, not your repo.
Which is cheaper to run in production?
Qwen 2.5 Coder 32B output tokens are $0.72/1M versus $0.9/1M. Input prices and retry rates still move the real bill.
Which is faster, Codestral 25.01 or Qwen 2.5 Coder 32B?
Codestral 25.01 has the lower time-to-first-token (150 ms vs 180 ms). Tokens/sec is a separate column if you care about long completions.
Which has the larger context window?
Codestral 25.01 accepts 256k tokens versus 131k.
Can I self-host either model?
Qwen 2.5 Coder 32B is marked open-weights in our catalog. The other side is a closed API. Check the provider license before you ship weights.
Are these scores from CompareLLM’s own evals?
No. V1 aggregates public leaderboards (and optional first-party latency pings). Each cell names its source and date. Read /methodology.
What does preference Elo mean on this page?
Preference Elo is a crowd vote from LMArena / Arena. People see two hidden answers and pick the one they like more. The model that wins more often gets a higher Elo. That means people preferred it — not that it passed a school test. It is not SWE-bench, not accuracy, and not a number we invent. Codestral 25.01 and Qwen 2.5 Coder 32B Elo cells are dated snapshots from the named source — we do not compute Arena ourselves.

Related news

  • launch · Jan 14, 2025

    Codestral 25.01: Mistral’s code-specialist row

Similar Head-to-Head Comparisons

All Codestral 25.01 matchups →|All Qwen 2.5 Coder 32B matchups →
Codestral 25.01 vs Mistral Large 3 (next mistral)Qwen 2.5 Coder 32B vs Qwen 2.5 Plus (previous qwen)Qwen 2.5 Coder 32B vs Qwen3 235B (next qwen)Mistral Large 3 vs Qwen 2.5 Coder 32BQwen 3 Max vs Qwen 2.5 Coder 32BQwen QwQ 32B vs Qwen 2.5 Coder 32B