Pairwise benchmark snapshot · Aug 1, 2026noindex (thin pair)

Qwen 2.5 Coder 32B vs Recraft V4.1 Utility Pro benchmark

Name: Qwen 2.5 Coder 32B vs Recraft V4.1 Utility Pro AI benchmark comparison
Creator: CompareLLM
License: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

Comparing verified benchmark accuracy, speed, and token pricing between Qwen 2.5 Coder 32B and Recraft V4.1 Utility Pro. Review the complete breakdown below to determine which model best fits your performance and budget requirements.

Share Analysis:

Alibaba

Qwen 2.5 Coder 32B

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

Img Elo 1,425

Recraft

Recraft V4.1 Utility Pro

Specialized generative model for vector art, icon sets, illustrations, and commercial design assets with native brand color matching.

Img Elo 1,218$210/1k imgs

Top Rival Showdowns for Qwen 2.5 Coder 32B

All Matchups

Compare vs:vs GPT Image 2 (High)vs Reve 2.1 vs Nano Banana Pro (Gemini 3 Pro Image)vs FLUX.2 [max]vs Ideogram 4.0 (Quality)

Image Quality Leader

No shared data

Single model data

Generation Speed Leader

No shared data

No latency data

Value per Dollar Leader

No shared data

Unpriced

Head-to-Head Comparison

Overall Matchup Breakdown

Category wins across reasoning intelligence, generation speed, and token cost.

Qwen 2.5 Coder 32B (0)vsRecraft V4.1 Utility Pro (5)

Qwen 2.5 Coder 32B: 0W (0%)Overall: Recraft V4.1 Utility ProRecraft V4.1 Utility Pro: 5W (100%)

← Qwen 2.5 Coder 32BRecraft V4.1 Utility Pro →

Recraft V4.1 Utility Pro (3/3)

Visual Quality & Adherence

Arena Preference Elo, prompt fidelity & typography score

Image Elo

—vs1,218

Prompt adherence

—vs91%

Text rendering

—vs94%

Qwen 2.5 Coder 32B: 0WRecraft V4.1 Utility Pro: 3W

Recraft V4.1 Utility Pro (1/1)

Generation Latency

Time to render full-resolution image snapshot (seconds)

Generation time

—vs4.6s

Qwen 2.5 Coder 32B: 0WRecraft V4.1 Utility Pro: 1W

Recraft V4.1 Utility Pro (1/1)

Cost Efficiency

API inference cost per 1,000 generated images

Price per 1k images

—vs$210/1k

Qwen 2.5 Coder 32B: 0WRecraft V4.1 Utility Pro: 1W

Side-by-Side Benchmark Matrix

Image Elo

Qwen 2.5 Coder 32B—

Recraft V4.1 Utility Pro1,218

seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026

Generation time

Qwen 2.5 Coder 32B—

Recraft V4.1 Utility Pro4.6s

seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026

Price per 1k images

Qwen 2.5 Coder 32B—

Recraft V4.1 Utility Pro$210/1k

seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026

Prompt adherence

Qwen 2.5 Coder 32B—

Recraft V4.1 Utility Pro91%

seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026

Text rendering

Qwen 2.5 Coder 32B—

Recraft V4.1 Utility Pro94%

seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026

Benchmark	Qwen 2.5 Coder 32B	Recraft V4.1 Utility Pro	Advantage Delta
Image Elo	—	1,218 seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026	—
Generation time	—	4.6s seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026	—
Price per 1k images	—	$210/1k seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026	—
Prompt adherence	—	91% seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026	—
Text rendering	—	94% seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026	—

Interactive Simulator (USD)

Workload Cost & Savings Calculator

Simulate monthly production API costs in USD (US Dollar).

Save up to 100% with Qwen 2.5 Coder 32B

Monthly Image Production Volume25k images / month (25000 imgs)

Quick Presets:

Qwen 2.5 Coder 32B$0.00 / mo

Rate: $0/1k

Recraft V4.1 Utility Pro$5,250.00 / mo

Rate: $210/1k

Estimated Cost Delta

Qwen 2.5 Coder 32B is estimated to save $5,250.00/month ($63,000/year).

Based on 25k images generated

Recommended Workload Routing

Repo / coding agentsinsufficient data

Need SWE-bench on both sides.

High-volume chatinsufficient data

Need list prices.

Voice / low-latency UIinsufficient data

Need TTFT on both sides.

Long-document RAGinsufficient data

Need context sizes.

Screenshots / visionRecraft V4.1 Utility Pro

Recraft V4.1 Utility Pro is the side marked multimodal in the catalog.

Target Workload	Recommended Pick	Evaluation Rationale
Repo / coding agents	insufficient data	Need SWE-bench on both sides.
High-volume chat	insufficient data	Need list prices.
Voice / low-latency UI	insufficient data	Need TTFT on both sides.
Long-document RAG	insufficient data	Need context sizes.
Screenshots / vision	Recraft V4.1 Utility Pro	Recraft V4.1 Utility Pro is the side marked multimodal in the catalog.

Community Sentiment

Cast Your Matchup Vote

0 total votes

Community Discussions (0)

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

Share card

The real PNG is generated at /compare/qwen-2-5-coder-32b-vs-recraft-v4-1-pro/opengraph-image for crawlers.

PNG

CompareLLM Matrix

Verified head-to-head card

LIVE

Alibaba

Qwen 2.5 Coder 32B

Elo 1,425

LiveBench64.8%

SWE-bench65.2%

Speed110 tok/s

Output cost$0.72/1M

Recraft

Recraft V4.1 Utility Pro

Elo n/a

LiveBench—

SWE-bench—

Speed—

Output cost—

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is better overall, Qwen 2.5 Coder 32B or Recraft V4.1 Utility Pro?: We do not have preference Elo for both models, so we do not declare an overall winner. Compare the metrics that exist.
Which is better at coding, Qwen 2.5 Coder 32B or Recraft V4.1 Utility Pro?: SWE-bench is missing for at least one model, so we do not rank coding from a single number.
Which is cheaper to run in production?: List prices are missing for at least one model.
Which is faster, Qwen 2.5 Coder 32B or Recraft V4.1 Utility Pro?: We do not have TTFT for both models.
Which has the larger context window?: Context window is missing for at least one model.
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. Qwen 2.5 Coder 32B and Recraft V4.1 Utility Pro Elo cells are dated snapshots from the named source — we do not compute Arena ourselves.

Similar Head-to-Head Comparisons

All Qwen 2.5 Coder 32B matchups →|All Recraft V4.1 Utility Pro matchups →

Qwen 2.5 Coder 32B vs Qwen 2.5 Plus (previous qwen)Qwen 2.5 Coder 32B vs Qwen3 235B (next qwen)Recraft V4.1 Utility Pro vs Recraft V4.1 Utility (previous recraft)Qwen QwQ 32B vs Qwen 2.5 Coder 32B Qwen 3 Max vs Qwen 2.5 Coder 32B Qwen Image 2.0 Pro vs Recraft V4.1 Utility Pro

Side-by-Side Benchmark Matrix

Image Elo

Qwen 2.5 Coder 32B—

Recraft V4.1 Utility Pro1,218

seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026

Generation time

Qwen 2.5 Coder 32B—

Recraft V4.1 Utility Pro4.6s

seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026

Price per 1k images

Qwen 2.5 Coder 32B—

Recraft V4.1 Utility Pro$210/1k

seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026

Prompt adherence

Qwen 2.5 Coder 32B—

Recraft V4.1 Utility Pro91%

seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026

Text rendering

Qwen 2.5 Coder 32B—

Recraft V4.1 Utility Pro94%

seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026

Benchmark	Qwen 2.5 Coder 32B	Recraft V4.1 Utility Pro	Advantage Delta
Image Elo	—	1,218 seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026	—
Generation time	—	4.6s seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026	—
Price per 1k images	—	$210/1k seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026	—
Prompt adherence	—	91% seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026	—
Text rendering	—	94% seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026	—

Recommended Workload Routing

Repo / coding agentsinsufficient data

Need SWE-bench on both sides.

High-volume chatinsufficient data

Need list prices.

Voice / low-latency UIinsufficient data

Need TTFT on both sides.

Long-document RAGinsufficient data

Need context sizes.

Screenshots / visionRecraft V4.1 Utility Pro

Recraft V4.1 Utility Pro is the side marked multimodal in the catalog.

Target Workload	Recommended Pick	Evaluation Rationale
Repo / coding agents	insufficient data	Need SWE-bench on both sides.
High-volume chat	insufficient data	Need list prices.
Voice / low-latency UI	insufficient data	Need TTFT on both sides.
Long-document RAG	insufficient data	Need context sizes.
Screenshots / vision	Recraft V4.1 Utility Pro	Recraft V4.1 Utility Pro is the side marked multimodal in the catalog.

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is better overall, Qwen 2.5 Coder 32B or Recraft V4.1 Utility Pro?

We do not have preference Elo for both models, so we do not declare an overall winner. Compare the metrics that exist.

Which is better at coding, Qwen 2.5 Coder 32B or Recraft V4.1 Utility Pro?

SWE-bench is missing for at least one model, so we do not rank coding from a single number.

Which is cheaper to run in production?

List prices are missing for at least one model.

Which is faster, Qwen 2.5 Coder 32B or Recraft V4.1 Utility Pro?

We do not have TTFT for both models.

Which has the larger context window?

Context window is missing for at least one model.

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. Qwen 2.5 Coder 32B and Recraft V4.1 Utility Pro Elo cells are dated snapshots from the named source — we do not compute Arena ourselves.