GPT-4o vs Qwen2.5 32B Instruct
Too close to call on our weighted score (GPT-4o 43, Qwen2.5 32B Instruct 43). The right pick depends on what you value most.
OpenAIGPT-4o
43/100- ECI129.0
- Price$2.50 / $10.00
- Context128K
Alibaba (Qwen)Qwen2.5 32B Instruct
43/100- ECI128.5
- Price$0.70 / $2.80
- Context131K
Add a model
Make it a three-way comparison.
Too close to call
It is close. Our weighted score puts them within a point (GPT-4o 43/100, Qwen2.5 32B Instruct 43/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: GPT-4o for raw capability, Qwen2.5 32B Instruct on price and Qwen2.5 32B Instruct for long inputs. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.
- CapabilityGPT-4oCapabilities Index (ECI): GPT-4o 129.0 · Qwen2.5 32B Instruct 128.5
- Lowest priceQwen2.5 32B InstructQwen2.5 32B Instruct $1.23 · GPT-4o $4.38 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextQwen2.5 32B InstructQwen2.5 32B Instruct 131,072 · GPT-4o 128,000 tokens
- Widest inputsGPT-4oGPT-4o: Text, Images, PDFs · Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: Text
- Self-hostingQwen2.5 32B InstructPublishes downloadable weights
| Measure | Weight | GPT-4o | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|---|
| CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI) | 50% | 52 | 51 |
| Price | 25% | 19 | 46 |
| Inputs & features | 15% | 70 | 25 |
| Context window | 10% | 24 | 24 |
| Overall | 100% | 43/100 | 43/100 |
Every spec in one table
Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.
| Specification | GPT-4oOpenAI | Qwen2.5 32B InstructAlibaba (Qwen) |
|---|---|---|
| Capability | ||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | 129.0 (best) | 128.5 |
| ECI rank | #129 of 148 (best) | #131 of 148 |
| GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions | 48.9% (best) | 46.1% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics | 6.3% | 7.4% (best) |
| Price per million tokens | ||
| Input | $2.50 | $0.70 (best) |
| Output | $10.00 | $2.80 (best) |
| Cached input | $1.25 | — |
| Blended (3:1) | $4.38 | $1.23 (best) |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Official OpenAI API | Official Alibaba API |
| Limits | ||
| Context window | 128,000 tokens | 131,072 tokens (best) |
| Max output | 16,384 tokens (best) | 8,192 tokens |
| Inputs and features | ||
| Text | Yes | Yes |
| Images | Yes | No |
| PDFs | Yes | No |
| Audio | No | No |
| Video | No | No |
| Reasoning | No | No |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | Yes | No |
| Availability | ||
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| API model ID | gpt-4o | qwen2-5-32b-instruct |
| API providers | 19 (best) | 1 |
| Released | May 13, 2024 | Sep 17, 2024 |
| Knowledge cutoff | Sep 2023 | Apr 2024 |
What would a month cost?
Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.
- GPT-4o$45.00
- Qwen2.5 32B Instruct$12.60
Which should you choose?
Which is better: GPT-4o or Qwen2.5 32B Instruct?
It is close. Our weighted score puts them within a point (GPT-4o 43/100, Qwen2.5 32B Instruct 43/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: GPT-4o for raw capability, Qwen2.5 32B Instruct on price and Qwen2.5 32B Instruct for long inputs. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.
Which is cheaper, GPT-4o or Qwen2.5 32B Instruct?
Qwen2.5 32B Instruct is cheaper at $0.70 input / $2.80 output per million tokens (official Alibaba API price). GPT-4o costs $2.50 input / $10.00 output per million tokens (official OpenAI API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $1.23 per million tokens for Qwen2.5 32B Instruct versus $4.38 for GPT-4o (3.6× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
GPT-4o scores higher on the Capabilities Index (ECI): GPT-4o 129.0 (#129 of 148) and Qwen2.5 32B Instruct 128.5 (#131 of 148). The confidence ranges of the top two overlap (124.2–131.5 vs 123.5–130.0), so treat the gap as small. On individual benchmarks: GPQA Diamond — GPT-4o 48.9%, Qwen2.5 32B Instruct 46.1%; OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025 — Qwen2.5 32B Instruct 7.4%, GPT-4o 6.3%.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for GPT-4o and Qwen2.5 32B Instruct yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. On overall capability, GPT-4o leads, which tends to carry over to coding, but test on your own codebase. Both support tool calling for agent workflows.
Which has the bigger context window?
Qwen2.5 32B Instruct has the largest context window at 131,072 tokens, against 128,000 for GPT-4o. Maximum output per response: GPT-4o up to 16,384, Qwen2.5 32B Instruct up to 8,192 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
GPT-4o accepts text, images and PDFs; Qwen2.5 32B Instruct accepts text. GPT-4o handles the widest range of inputs.
Are any of these open source?
Qwen2.5 32B Instruct publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; GPT-4o is proprietary.
Which is newer?
Qwen2.5 32B Instruct is the newest, released Sep 17, 2024. GPT-4o came out May 13, 2024. Knowledge cutoff: GPT-4o Sep 2023, Qwen2.5 32B Instruct Apr 2024.
How do you decide the winner?
Each model gets a 0–100 score on capability (50%, independent benchmark results); price (25%, blended price per million tokens (3 input : 1 output), log scale); inputs & features (15%, image, PDF, audio and video input, tool calling, structured output and reasoning); context window (10%, maximum tokens per request, log scale). Dimensions missing for any model are dropped and the remaining weights rescaled, so every model is judged on the same evidence. Specs and prices come from public model listings and the labs’ own API pages; capability scores come from independent benchmark runs. Data updated Oct 4, 2026.
Related comparisons
- Add Qwen2.5 72B InstructThree-way comparison
- GPT-4o vs Qwen2.5 72B InstructAlibaba (Qwen) · ECI 129.0
- GPT-4o vs Mistral Large 2.1Mistral AI · ECI 128.5
- GPT-4o vs Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2Anthropic · ECI 133.5
- GPT-4o vs Llama-3.1-70B-InstructMeta · ECI 125.9
- Qwen2.5 32B Instruct vs Mistral Large 2.1Mistral AI · ECI 128.5
- Qwen2.5 32B Instruct vs Llama-3.3-70B-InstructMeta · ECI 127.3
