SOLAR 10.7B Instruct v1.0 vs Qwen2.5-Coder-32B-Instruct
Qwen2.5-Coder-32B-Instruct comes out ahead, 25 to 0 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.
UpstageSOLAR 10.7B Instruct v1.0
0/100- ECI—
- Price—
- Context4K
- Our pick
Alibaba (Qwen)Qwen2.5-Coder-32B-Instruct
25/100- ECI—
- Price$0.66 / $1.00
- Context131K
Add a model
Make it a three-way comparison.
Qwen2.5-Coder-32B-Instruct is our pick
Qwen2.5-Coder-32B-Instruct is the better all-round choice, scoring 25/100 against SOLAR 10.7B Instruct v1.0 (0). It leads on inputs & features and context window. The score weighs inputs & features 60%, context window 40%. 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 priceQwen2.5-Coder-32B-InstructQwen2.5-Coder-32B-Instruct $0.745 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend) · SOLAR 10.7B Instruct v1.0 unpriced
- Longest contextQwen2.5-Coder-32B-InstructQwen2.5-Coder-32B-Instruct 131,072 · SOLAR 10.7B Instruct v1.0 4,096 tokens
- Widest inputsSame inputsSOLAR 10.7B Instruct v1.0: Text · Qwen2.5-Coder-32B-Instruct: Text
- Self-hostingAll open weightsEvery model here can be downloaded and run on your own hardware
| Measure | Weight | SOLAR 10.7B Instruct v1.0 | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B-Instruct |
|---|---|---|---|
| Inputs & features | 60% | 0 | 25 |
| Context window | 40% | 0 | 25 |
| Overall | 100% | 0/100 | 25/100 |
Left out because at least one model lacks the data: capability and price. The remaining weights were rescaled.
Every spec in one table
Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.
| Specification | SOLAR 10.7B Instruct v1.0Upstage | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B-InstructAlibaba (Qwen) |
|---|---|---|
| Capability | ||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | — |
| ECI rank | — | — |
| Price per million tokens | ||
| Input | — | $0.66 |
| Output | — | $1.00 |
| Cached input | — | — |
| Blended (3:1) | — | $0.745 |
| Long-context rate | — | Same rate |
| Price source | — | Median of 7 providers |
| Limits | ||
| Context window | 4,096 tokens | 131,072 tokens (best) |
| Max output | 4,096 tokens | 8,192 tokens (best) |
| Inputs and features | ||
| Text | Yes | Yes |
| Images | No | No |
| PDFs | No | No |
| Audio | No | No |
| Video | No | No |
| Reasoning | No | No |
| Tool calling | No | Yes |
| Structured output | No | No |
| Availability | ||
| Weights | OpenCC-BY-NC-4.0 | Open |
| API model ID | — | — |
| API providers | — | 7 |
| Released | Dec 12, 2023 | Nov 12, 2024 |
| Knowledge cutoff | — | — |
What would a month cost?
Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.
- SOLAR 10.7B Instruct v1.0—
- Qwen2.5-Coder-32B-Instruct$8.60
Which should you choose?
Which is better: SOLAR 10.7B Instruct v1.0 or Qwen2.5-Coder-32B-Instruct?
Qwen2.5-Coder-32B-Instruct is the better all-round choice, scoring 25/100 against SOLAR 10.7B Instruct v1.0 (0). It leads on inputs & features and context window. The score weighs inputs & features 60%, context window 40%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.
Which is cheaper, SOLAR 10.7B Instruct v1.0 or Qwen2.5-Coder-32B-Instruct?
Qwen2.5-Coder-32B-Instruct is cheaper at $0.66 input / $1.00 output per million tokens (median across 7 API providers). . At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.745 per million tokens for Qwen2.5-Coder-32B-Instruct versus . SOLAR 10.7B Instruct v1.0 has no published per-token price.
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
There is no independent benchmark that covers both models yet. SOLAR 10.7B Instruct v1.0 has not been scored yet and Qwen2.5-Coder-32B-Instruct has not been scored yet.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for SOLAR 10.7B Instruct v1.0 and Qwen2.5-Coder-32B-Instruct yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. Note that SOLAR 10.7B Instruct v1.0 does not support tool calling, which most coding agents need.
Which has the bigger context window?
Qwen2.5-Coder-32B-Instruct has the largest context window at 131,072 tokens, against 4,096 for SOLAR 10.7B Instruct v1.0. Maximum output per response: SOLAR 10.7B Instruct v1.0 up to 4,096, Qwen2.5-Coder-32B-Instruct up to 8,192 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
SOLAR 10.7B Instruct v1.0 accepts text; Qwen2.5-Coder-32B-Instruct accepts text. They handle the same number of input types.
Are any of these open source?
Yes, both publish their weights (CC-BY-NC-4.0), so you can self-host them.
Which is newer?
Qwen2.5-Coder-32B-Instruct is the newest, released Nov 12, 2024. SOLAR 10.7B Instruct v1.0 came out Dec 12, 2023.
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 Nov 2, 2026.
Related comparisons
- Add Qwen Plus Character (Japanese)Three-way comparison
- SOLAR 10.7B Instruct v1.0 vs Qwen Plus Character (Japanese)Alibaba (Qwen)
- SOLAR 10.7B Instruct v1.0 vs Hermes 2 Pro Llama 3 8BNous Research
- SOLAR 10.7B Instruct v1.0 vs Vision LargeVispark
- SOLAR 10.7B Instruct v1.0 vs CodestralMistral AI
- Qwen2.5-Coder-32B-Instruct vs Aya Expanse 32BCohere
- Qwen2.5-Coder-32B-Instruct vs Hermes 3 70B InstructNous Research
