📡 LLM Pulse|🆕 New on leaderboard: Baidu: ERNIE-Light-DT-1.0 by Baidu — $1.13/M tokensLearn more →1/10

Measurement sources and verification status (12 fields)

Collected third-party figures are not independent tests. A source link and collection date do not establish reproducibility. Exact model version, dataset and test settings may be missing. No independent verification date is supplied.

speed: 115

latency: 0.38

contextWindow: 32768

inputPrice: 0.66

outputPrice: 1

benchmarkMmlu: 81.2

benchmarkHumanEval: 92.7

benchmarkMath: 81

benchmarkGpqa: 46

reasoningScore: 65

codingScore: 92.7

benchmarkSweBench: 51

Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct

qwen🔒 Proprietary

LLM Stats Scores

65.0

Reasoning

92.7

Coding

🎯

46.0%GPQA Diamond — graduate-level science accuracy

Published benchmark evidence

Task scores are reported independently by each publisher; they are not combined into a hidden quality score.

View HLE source ↗

3.5%

Humanity's Last Exam

51.0%

SWE-bench

Quality Score

76.0

Overall (0–100)

Speed

115 c/s

characters/second

Latency (TTFT)

0.38s

to first token

Input Price

$0.66

per 1M tokens

Output Price

per 1M tokens

Context Window

33K

tokens

Release Date

2024-11-11

30-Day Rank History

📊 Benchmark Scores

Reported scores · % accuracy

What do these benchmarks test?

🎯

GPQA Diamond46.0%Below avg

Designed so that even PhD-level human experts average ~65–70%. A score above 80% signals near-expert scientific reasoning that goes far beyond memorisation.

🧠

MMLU81.2%Solid

The classic academic breadth benchmark. Top frontier models now score above 85%, so it best distinguishes mid-tier from strong generalist models.

💻

HumanEval92.7%Top tier

Measures whether a model writes functionally correct code — not just plausible-looking syntax. Strong scores (>85%) indicate reliable day-to-day coding assistance.

∑

MATH Benchmark81.0%Top tier

Tests multi-step mathematical reasoning under strict correctness. Even a 60% score requires strong chain-of-thought; top reasoning models now exceed 90%.