Head-to-Head Model Comparison

Pixtral 12B vs Qwen 2.5 32B Instruct

Benchmarks, API Token Pricing, Context Window & Speed Comparison

Geprüft vom GetInfoUs-ForschungsteamZuletzt geprüft: October 2026Redaktionelle Richtlinien
Teilen
Related topics (12)
AI CompareAI BenchmarkToken PricingModel CostModel SpecsSWE-bench CodingModel VersusWhich AI ModelLLM Speed & LatencyReasoning ModelsExtended ThinkingPrompt Caching ROI
Pixtral 12B vs Qwen 2.5 32B Instruct: Benchmarks, Pricing & Speed Comparison

Pixtral 12B von Mistral AI und Qwen 2.5 32B Instruct von Alibaba gehören zu den führenden KI-Modellen. Pixtral 12B bietet ein Kontextfenster von 128K Tokens bei API-Preisen von $0.15/$0.15 pro 1M Tokens, während Qwen 2.5 32B Instruct 131.1K Tokens Kontext zu $0.18/$0.36 pro 1M Tokens bereitstellt. Hier finden Sie den vollständigen Benchmark-, Latenz- und Kostenvergleich.

Direktvergleich (VS)

Beliebige Modelle wechseln & vergleichen

Select any AI models from our verified benchmark database to generate live side-by-side matrices.

Profile
Profile
Multi-Model Arena Stack:
5-Model Matrix Workbench
Popular Matchups:
Mistral AI

Pixtral 12B

Nativ Multimodale KI

Pixtral 12B von Mistral AI ist ein KI-Modell für nativ multimodale Verarbeitung von Text und Bild sowie visuelle Dokumentenanalyse mit 128K Kontextfenster, 85 Token/s Durchsatz, einem Intelligenz-Index von 40/100 und $0.15/$0.15 pro 1M Toke

Intelligence Index40 / 100
Input Token:

$0.15 / 1M

Output Token:

$0.15 / 1M

Context Window:

128K tokens

SWE-bench Verified:

28%

Alibaba

Qwen 2.5 32B Instruct

Open-Weights-Basismodell

Qwen 2.5 32B Instruct von Alibaba ist ein KI-Modell für Self-Hosting im eigenen Rechenzentrum, Fine-Tuning und volle Datensouveränität mit 131K Kontextfenster, 85 Token/s Durchsatz, einem Intelligenz-Index von 41/100 und $0.18/$0.36 pro 1M

Intelligence Index41 / 100
Input Token:

$0.18 / 1M

Output Token:

$0.36 / 1M

Context Window:

131.1K tokens

SWE-bench Verified:

40.8%

Wichtigste Unterschiede auf einen Blick

  • Pixtral 12B is 1.5x cheaper for API usage (input + output tokens combined).
  • Qwen 2.5 32B Instruct has a larger context window (131K vs 128K tokens).
  • Qwen 2.5 32B Instruct is faster at 85 tok/s vs 85 tok/s.
  • Qwen 2.5 32B Instruct leads on SWE-bench coding (40.8% vs 28.0%).
Need definitions for token pricing, context, or benchmarks?Explore AI Glossary →
FeaturePixtral 12BQwen 2.5 32B Instruct
Intelligence Index
Composite reasoning & knowledge score (0-100)
4041
Provider
Mistral AIAlibaba
Input Price
Cost per million input tokens
$0.15 / 1M$0.18 / 1M
Output Price
Cost per million output tokens
$0.15 / 1M$0.36 / 1M
Blended Price
Weighted 7:2:1 cache:input:output per 1M
$0.08 / 1M$0.10 / 1M
Context Window
Maximum input + output tokens
128K tokens~192 A4 pages of text131.1K tokens~197 A4 pages of text
Max Output Tokens
Per single request
8K8K
Throughput Speed
Tokens generated per second
85 tok/s85 tok/s
SWE-bench Verified
Real-world software engineering
28%40.8%
GPQA Diamond
Graduate-level reasoning
43.8%48.5%
Cached Input Price
Prompt caching discount per 1M tokens
$0.05 / 1M$0.04 / 1M

Wer gewinnt in welcher Disziplin?

At-a-glance decision framework
Coding
Qwen 2.5 32B Instruct
+12.8% SWE-bench lead
Cost
Pixtral 12B
1.5x cheaper monthly runtime
Speed
Qwen 2.5 32B Instruct
+0% faster generation
Context
Qwen 2.5 32B Instruct
131.1K tokens window

Geprüfte Benchmark-Ergebnisse im Vergleich

Official evaluation metrics verified by independent third-party research labs.

Pixtral 12BQwen 2.5 32B Instruct
SWE-bench Verified (Autonomous Coding)

Industry benchmark evaluating real-world GitHub issue resolution and multi-file debugging.

28%vs40.8%
GPQA Diamond (Doctorate-Level Science & Math)

Challenging questions created by domain experts to test complex PhD-level reasoning.

43.8%vs48.5%
MMLU-Pro (Multi-task Language Understanding)

Hardened reasoning and academic knowledge benchmark with reduced lucky-guess probability.

67.5%vs67.2%
LMSYS Chatbot Arena Elo

Crowdsourced human preference evaluation based on blind, head-to-head model battles.

1225ptsvs1255pts
Humanity's Last Exam (Frontier Expert Knowledge)

Extremely difficult, closed-ended questions spanning the frontier of human expert knowledge.

N/Avs5.6%
Terminal-Bench (Agentic Coding & Terminal Use)

Autonomous multi-step tasks executed inside a real command-line terminal environment.

24%vs26.2%
SciCode (Scientific Computing)

Research-grade coding problems drawn from real scientific and numerical workloads.

N/Avs26.5%
LiveCodeBench (Competitive Coding)

Contamination-free competitive programming problems collected continuously over time.

N/Avs42.1%
AIME (Advanced Math Competition)

American Invitational Mathematics Examination — multi-step Olympiad-level reasoning.

48%vs52.3%
Long-Context Reasoning

Accuracy when reasoning over very large inputs that fill the model context window.

65%vs64%
Generation Speed (Throughput)

Tokens emitted per second during active generation streaming.

85 tok/s vs85 tok/s

Latenz & Antwortzeit

Time to first token (TTFT) and estimated end-to-end response time for a typical 500-token response.

Time to First Token (TTFT)Lower is better
Pixtral 12B0.45s
Qwen 2.5 32B Instruct0.48s
Est. End-to-End Response (500 tokens)TTFT + generation time
Pixtral 12B6.33s
Qwen 2.5 32B Instruct6.36s

Interaktiver Token-Kosten-Simulator

Adjust sliders to calculate projected monthly cloud API spending with prompt caching discounts.

100K / day
10K500K1M
30K / day
5K150K300K
50% cached
0% (Cold)50%90% (Warm)
Pixtral 12B Monthly API Bill
$0.43 / month
$0.15/1M in · $0.15/1M out
Qwen 2.5 32B Instruct Monthly API Bill
$0.65 / month
$0.18/1M in · $0.36/1M out
Pixtral 12B saves approximately $0.21 / month (33%) under this workload.1.5x Savings

Pixtral 12B · Strengths & Key Advantages

  • 128K Kontextfenster und bis zu 8K maximale Output-Token (SWE-bench Verified 28% · GPQA Diamond 43.8%)
  • Hohe Generierungsgeschwindigkeit von 85 Token/Sekunde bei nur 450 ms Erstlatenz (TTFT)
  • Offene Modellgewichte (12B) für lokales Self-Hosting und Fine-Tuning über vLLM, SGLang oder Ollama
Considerations & Trade-offs
  • Erfordert dedizierte GPU-Hardware mit ausreichend VRAM für den lokalen Betrieb in voller Präzision
  • Bei extrem komplexen mehrstufigen Forschungsfragen bieten schwere Reasoning-Spezialmodelle noch tiefere Analysen

Qwen 2.5 32B Instruct · Strengths & Key Advantages

  • 131K Kontextfenster und bis zu 8K maximale Output-Token (SWE-bench Verified 40.8% · GPQA Diamond 48.5%)
  • Hohe Generierungsgeschwindigkeit von 85 Token/Sekunde bei nur 480 ms Erstlatenz (TTFT)
  • Offene Modellgewichte (32B) für lokales Self-Hosting und Fine-Tuning über vLLM, SGLang oder Ollama
Considerations & Trade-offs
  • Erfordert dedizierte GPU-Hardware mit ausreichend VRAM für den lokalen Betrieb in voller Präzision
  • Bei extrem komplexen mehrstufigen Forschungsfragen bieten schwere Reasoning-Spezialmodelle noch tiefere Analysen

Token Use & Task Economics

Estimated cost and token consumption to complete one representative agentic task.

MetricPixtral 12BQwen 2.5 32B Instruct
Cost per Task
Estimated USD to finish one task
$0.09$0.16
Output Tokens / Task
Tokens generated per task
25K28K
Reasoning Tokens / Task
Thinking tokens burned per task
0K0K

Technische Spezifikationen

Architecture, release timeline, capabilities, and modalities.

FeaturePixtral 12BQwen 2.5 32B Instruct
Official API Model ID (SDK)pixtral-12b-latestqwen-2-5-32b-instruct
API ProtocolOpenAI-Compatible REST / vLLM / SGLang / HuggingFace TGIOpenAI-Compatible REST / vLLM / SGLang / HuggingFace TGI
Release Date2024-092024-09
Knowledge CutoffAugust 2024June 2024
ArchitectureMultimodal Vision-Language TransformerDense Autoregressive Transformer
Parameters12B32B
Enterprise Rate Limits (RPM / TPM)Unlimited (Hardware-bound on self-hosted GPU) / 10,000 RPM Cloud · Unlimited local throughput / 10M+ TPM Managed CloudUnlimited (Hardware-bound on self-hosted GPU) / 10,000 RPM Cloud · Unlimited local throughput / 10M+ TPM Managed Cloud
Long-Context Tier (>128K/200K)Flat rate ($0.15/1M in) across full 128K windowFlat rate ($0.18/1M in) across full 131K window
Prompt Cache Policy & TTLCached input at $0.05/1M tokensCached input at $0.036/1M tokens
Computer Use / GUI AgentAPI / CLI Tool-Use & DOM Agent ready (no raw pixel desktop click loop)API / CLI Tool-Use & DOM Agent ready (no raw pixel desktop click loop)
MCP & Parallel Tool CallingNative MCP Client/Server ready · Parallel function calling · 100% Strict JSON SchemaNative MCP Client/Server ready · Parallel function calling · 100% Strict JSON Schema
Web Search Grounding & SandboxSupported via external Tavily/Exa Search & E2B/Docker Sandbox toolsSupported via external Tavily/Exa Search & E2B/Docker Sandbox tools
Official Fine-Tuning SupportFull Weights SFT, LoRA, QLoRA, DPO & GRPO RL (Unsloth / Axolotl / Llama-Factory)Full Weights SFT, LoRA, QLoRA, DPO & GRPO RL (Unsloth / Axolotl / Llama-Factory)
Multimodal Token BillingText BPE (~4 chars/token) · Vision (~258–765 tokens per image tile)Text BPE (~4 chars/token)
Quantization & Min GPU VRAMBF16 / FP16, FP8 Dynamic, INT4 AWQ / GPTQ, GGUF (Q4_K_M / Q8_0) · 7 GB VRAM (4-bit Quantized) · 26 GB VRAM (Native BF16)BF16 / FP16, FP8 Dynamic, INT4 AWQ / GPTQ, GGUF (Q4_K_M / Q8_0) · 20 GB VRAM (4-bit Quantized) · 69 GB VRAM (Native BF16)
Safety & Frontier ClassificationOpen-Weights System Card + Customizable Guardrail Layer (Llama Guard / ShieldGemma)Open-Weights System Card + Customizable Guardrail Layer (Llama Guard / ShieldGemma)
Enterprise Compliance (ZDR/HIPAA/SOC2)100% Air-Gapped On-Premises / Private VPC · Full HIPAA, GDPR & SOC2 Control100% Air-Gapped On-Premises / Private VPC · Full HIPAA, GDPR & SOC2 Control
Input Modalitiestext, visiontext
Output Modalitiestexttext

Pixtral 12B vs Qwen 2.5 32B Instruct: Schnelle Antworten (FAQ)

Which is more intelligent, Pixtral 12B or Qwen 2.5 32B Instruct?

Qwen 2.5 32B Instruct is more intelligent. It scores 41 compared with 40 on the composite Intelligence Index.

Which model is cheaper to run?

Pixtral 12B is cheaper at $0.08 per 1M tokens blended, compared with $0.10 (7:2:1 cache:input:output ratio).

Which model has lower latency?

Pixtral 12B has lower latency, with a time to first token of 0.45s compared with 0.48s.

Which model has a larger context window?

Qwen 2.5 32B Instruct has a larger context window, supporting 131.1K tokens compared with 128K tokens.

Fazit

Sowohl Pixtral 12B (Optimal für nativ multimodale Verarbeitung von Text und Bild sowie visuelle Dokumentenanalyse, Enterprise-RAG-Systeme und skalierbare API-Pipelines.) als auch Qwen 2.5 32B Instruct (Optimal für Self-Hosting im eigenen Rechenzentrum, Fine-Tuning und volle Datensouveränität, Enterprise-RAG-Systeme und skalierbare API-Pipelines.) überzeugen im Produktionseinsatz: Qwen 2.5 32B Instruct führt bei komplexem Reasoning und Coding, Pixtral 12B liefert den höheren Token-Durchsatz und Pixtral 12B ist die kosteneffizienteste Wahl für große API-Workloads.

Häufig gestellte Fragen (FAQ)

Welches Modell ist besser für Coding und Reasoning – Pixtral 12B oder Qwen 2.5 32B Instruct?+

Im Gesamt-Intelligenzindex und bei Software-Benchmarks liegt Qwen 2.5 32B Instruct vorn. Prüfen Sie oben die SWE-bench- und GPQA-Werte für Ihren Anwendungsfall.

Wie unterscheiden sich die API-Preise von Pixtral 12B und Qwen 2.5 32B Instruct?+

Pixtral 12B kostet $0.15 / $0.15 pro 1M Input-/Output-Tokens, Qwen 2.5 32B Instruct liegt bei $0.18 / $0.36. Beim gewichteten Gesamtpreis ist Pixtral 12B günstiger.

Welches Modell hat das größere Kontextfenster und die höhere Geschwindigkeit?+

Pixtral 12B bietet 128K Tokens Kontext gegenüber 131.1K Tokens bei Qwen 2.5 32B Instruct. Bei der Generierungsgeschwindigkeit liegt Pixtral 12B vorn.

AI Terminology & Guide
Explore Glossary →

Understand key metrics like context window, token pricing, reasoning mode, and SWE-bench scores in our comprehensive AI glossary.

Benchmark scores, token prices, and rate limits evolve rapidly as AI labs release model updates. Always verify current specifications and pricing on the official provider documentation.

Offizielle Quellen: Offizielle API-Dokumentation von Mistral AI und Alibaba, Systemkarten und unabhängige Benchmark-Auswertungen (2026).