ZMIME
Comparison · 2 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

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

Too close to call on our weighted score (Codestral 48, Qwen2.5-Coder-32B-Instruct 45). The right pick depends on what you value most.

  1. Alibaba (Qwen)

    Qwen2.5-Coder-32B-Instruct

    Released Nov 12, 2024

    45/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.43 / $0.60
    • Context131K
    Full specs Remove Qwen2.5-Coder-32B-Instruct

  2. Mistral AI

    Codestral

    Released May 29, 2024

    48/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.30 / $0.90
    • Context256K
    Full specs Remove Codestral

  3. Add a model

    Make it a three-way comparison.

01 — Verdict

Too close to call

It is close. Our weighted score puts them within 3 points (Codestral 48/100, Qwen2.5-Coder-32B-Instruct 45/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: Codestral on price and Codestral for long inputs. The score weighs price 50%, inputs & features 30%, context window 20%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.

  • CapabilityNot enough dataNo independent benchmark covers every model here yet
  • Lowest priceCodestralCodestral $0.45 · Qwen2.5-Coder-32B-Instruct $0.473 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextCodestralCodestral 256,000 · Qwen2.5-Coder-32B-Instruct 131,072 tokens
  • Widest inputsSame inputsQwen2.5-Coder-32B-Instruct: Text · Codestral: Text
  • Self-hostingAll open weightsEvery model here can be downloaded and run on your own hardware
How the score is built
MeasureWeightQwen2.5-Coder-32B-InstructCodestral
Price50%6566
Inputs & features30%2525
Context window20%2436
Overall100%45/10048/100

Left out because at least one model lacks the data: capability. The remaining weights were rescaled.

02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.

Qwen2.5-Coder-32B-Instruct vs Codestral specifications side by side
SpecificationQwen2.5-Coder-32B-InstructAlibaba (Qwen)CodestralMistral AI
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)——
ECI rank——
Price per million tokens
Input$0.43$0.30 (best)
Output$0.60 (best)$0.90
Cached input—$0.03
Blended (3:1)$0.473$0.45 (best)
Long-context rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceMedian of 4 providersOfficial Mistral API
Limits
Context window131,072 tokens256,000 tokens (best)
Max output8,192 tokens (best)4,096 tokens
Inputs and features
TextYesYes
ImagesNoNo
PDFsNoNo
AudioNoNo
VideoNoNo
ReasoningNoNo
Tool callingYesYes
Structured outputNoNo
Availability
WeightsOpenOpen
API model ID—codestral-latest
API providers4 (best)3
ReleasedNov 12, 2024May 29, 2024
Knowledge cutoff—Oct 2024
03 — Cost

What would a month cost?

Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.

  • Qwen2.5-Coder-32B-Instruct$5.50
  • Codestral$4.80
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Qwen2.5-Coder-32B-Instruct or Codestral?

It is close. Our weighted score puts them within 3 points (Codestral 48/100, Qwen2.5-Coder-32B-Instruct 45/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: Codestral on price and Codestral for long inputs. The score weighs price 50%, inputs & features 30%, context window 20%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.

Which is cheaper, Qwen2.5-Coder-32B-Instruct or Codestral?

Codestral is cheaper at $0.30 input / $0.90 output per million tokens (official Mistral API price). Qwen2.5-Coder-32B-Instruct costs $0.43 input / $0.60 output per million tokens (median across 4 API providers). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.45 per million tokens for Codestral versus $0.473 for Qwen2.5-Coder-32B-Instruct (1.1× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

There is no independent benchmark that covers both models yet. Qwen2.5-Coder-32B-Instruct has not been scored yet and Codestral has not been scored yet.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Qwen2.5-Coder-32B-Instruct and Codestral yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. Both support tool calling for agent workflows.

Which has the bigger context window?

Codestral has the largest context window at 256,000 tokens, against 131,072 for Qwen2.5-Coder-32B-Instruct. Maximum output per response: Qwen2.5-Coder-32B-Instruct up to 8,192, Codestral up to 4,096 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Qwen2.5-Coder-32B-Instruct accepts text; Codestral accepts text. They handle the same number of input types.

Are any of these open source?

Yes, both publish their weights, so you can self-host them.

Which is newer?

Qwen2.5-Coder-32B-Instruct is the newest, released Nov 12, 2024. Codestral came out May 29, 2024. Knowledge cutoff: Codestral Oct 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.

05 — Keep comparing

Related comparisons