Model comparison
Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct vs Step 3.7 Flash
Head-to-head evidence from 4 shared benchmark results across 2 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
BenchAlign evidence: Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct supported; Step 3.7 Flash estimated. Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct and Step 3.7 Flash share 4 comparable benchmark results. 0 of 8 categories are comparable. 0 results are unique to Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct; 26 to Step 3.7 Flash.
Updated July 16, 2026- Shared results
- 4
- Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct only
- 0
- Step 3.7 Flash only
- 26
- Comparable categories
- 0 / 8
Benchmark data for Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct and Step 3.7 Flash is coming soon on BenchLM.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 4 shared benchmark results across 2 evidence categories; 0 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.
Why this result
BenchLM has partial data for these models, but not enough overlapping benchmark coverage to produce a fair score-level comparison yet.
Step 3.7 Flash is priced at $0.20 input / $1.15 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.00 input / $0.00 output per 1M tokens for Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct. Step 3.7 Flash has the larger context window at 256K, compared with 128K for Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct.
Category breakdown
Exact category averages are shown below. Not measured means BenchLM does not have enough sourced public coverage for that model and category.
| Category | Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct | Δ | Step 3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|---|
| Agentic | Qwen2.5 Coder 32B InstructNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Step 3.7 Flash66.4 |
| Coding | Qwen2.5 Coder 32B InstructNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Step 3.7 Flash56.3 |
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct | Step 3.7 Flash | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct$0 input / $0 output | Step 3.7 Flash$0.2 input / $1.15 output | Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Qwen2.5 Coder 32B InstructNot available | Step 3.7 FlashNot available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Qwen2.5 Coder 32B InstructNot available | Step 3.7 FlashNot available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct128K | Step 3.7 Flash256K | Step 3.7 Flash lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic12 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct | Step 3.7 Flash | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | — | 59.5% | Not comparable |
| BrowseCompSource | — | 75.8% | Not comparable |
| DeepSearchQASource | — | 92.8% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 25.9% | Not comparable |
| ToolathlonSource | — | 49.5% | Not comparable |
| Claw-EvalSource | — | 67.1% | Not comparable |
| HLE w/ toolsSource | — | 47.2% | Not comparable |
| Gert LabsSource | — | 51.57% | Not comparable |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | — | 21.5% | Not comparable |
| τ²-bench resultsSource | — | 98.5% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 1017 | Not comparable |
| APEX-Agents-AASource | — | 14.8% | Not comparable |
Coding5 benchmarks
Reasoning2 benchmarks
Knowledge6 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct | Step 3.7 Flash | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 7.1% | 30.3% | Step 3.7 Flash leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 41.7% | 80.9% | Step 3.7 Flash leads |
| AA-HLESource | 3.8% | 19.9% | Step 3.7 Flash leads |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | — | -37.5% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | — | 25.4% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | — | 84.4% | Not comparable |
Multimodal4 benchmarks
Inst. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct | Step 3.7 Flash | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-IFBenchSource | — | 67.3% | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (3)
Can I compare Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct and Step 3.7 Flash on BenchLM yet?
Not fully yet. BenchLM is tracking both models, but the sourced benchmark breakdown for this comparison is still coming soon.
Why does this comparison show “coming soon”?
BenchLM only shows category winners and benchmark-level calls when we have sourced results that can be compared fairly. For these models, the public benchmark coverage is not complete enough yet.
What data is available for Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct and Step 3.7 Flash today?
Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct: $0.00 input / $0.00 output per 1M tokens Step 3.7 Flash: $0.20 input / $1.15 output per 1M tokens Both model pages still include creator, context window, reasoning mode, and other metadata while benchmark coverage fills in.
Related Comparisons
Explore More
The AI models change fast. We track them for you.
A weekly brief for engineers and researchers covering new models, ranking shifts, and pricing changes.
Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.