Cogito v2.1 (Reasoning) vs Qwen2.5 Instruct 32B: A Comparação Definitiva de Desempenho e Preço

Mergulhe profundamente em raciocínio, benchmarks e insights de latência.

O Veredicto Final no Confronto Cogito v2.1 (Reasoning) vs Qwen2.5 Instruct 32B

Após uma análise abrangente, Cogito v2.1 (Reasoning) surge como a escolha superior para usuários que priorizam inteligência e raciocínio brutos. No entanto, Qwen2.5 Instruct 32B continua a ser uma opção altamente competitiva, especialmente para cenários que exigem tempos de resposta mais rápidos e eficiência de custos. Esta detalhada comparação de Cogito v2.1 (Reasoning) vs Qwen2.5 Instruct 32B irá analisar cada métrica crítica para ajudá-lo a tomar a melhor decisão.

Explore os melhores cenários•Deixe o AI Selector recomendar os próximos passos

Instantâneo do Modelo

Principais métricas de decisão em um relance.

Cogito v2.1 (Reasoning)

Other

Raciocínio: 7
Codificação: 2
Multimodal: 5
Contexto Longo: 8
Preço Combinado / 1M tokens: $0.001
Latência P95: 1000ms
Tokens por segundo: 73.701tokens/seg

Qwen2.5 Instruct 32B

Other

Raciocínio: 6
Codificação: 6
Multimodal: 1
Contexto Longo: 2
Preço Combinado / 1M tokens: $0.015
Latência P95: 1000ms
Tokens por segundo: —

Overall Capabilities

The capability radar provides a holistic view of the Cogito v2.1 (Reasoning) vs Qwen2.5 Instruct 32B matchup. This chart illustrates each model's strengths and weaknesses at a glance, forming a cornerstone of our Cogito v2.1 (Reasoning) vs Qwen2.5 Instruct 32B analysis.

This radar chart visually maps the core capabilities (reasoning, coding, math proxy, multimodal, long context) of `Cogito v2.1 (Reasoning)` vs `Qwen2.5 Instruct 32B`.

Benchmark Breakdown

For a granular look, this chart directly compares scores across standardized benchmarks. In the critical MMLU Pro test, a key part of the Cogito v2.1 (Reasoning) vs Qwen2.5 Instruct 32B debate, Cogito v2.1 (Reasoning) scores 70 against Qwen2.5 Instruct 32B's 60. This data-driven approach is essential for any serious Cogito v2.1 (Reasoning) vs Qwen2.5 Instruct 32B comparison.

This grouped bar chart provides a side-by-side comparison for each benchmark metric.

Speed & Latency

Speed is a crucial factor in the Cogito v2.1 (Reasoning) vs Qwen2.5 Instruct 32B decision for interactive applications. The metrics below highlight the trade-offs you should weigh before shipping to production.

Time to First Token

Cogito v2.1 (Reasoning)300ms

Qwen2.5 Instruct 32B300ms

Tokens per Second

Cogito v2.1 (Reasoning)73.701

Qwen2.5 Instruct 32B52

Head to the playground to validate these results yourself

The Economics of Cogito v2.1 (Reasoning) vs Qwen2.5 Instruct 32B

Power is only one part of the equation. This Cogito v2.1 (Reasoning) vs Qwen2.5 Instruct 32B pricing analysis gives you a true sense of value.

Pricing Breakdown

Compare input and output pricing at a glance.

Real-World Cost Scenario

To process 1M input tokens and generate 250k output tokens, Cogito v2.1 (Reasoning) would cost $0.002, whereas Qwen2.5 Instruct 32B would cost $0.018. This practical calculation is vital for any developer considering the Cogito v2.1 (Reasoning) vs Qwen2.5 Instruct 32B choice.

Review the complete pricing and packaging strategy

Which Model Wins the Cogito v2.1 (Reasoning) vs Qwen2.5 Instruct 32B Battle for You?

Choose Cogito v2.1 (Reasoning) if...

You are working in a technical or scientific field requiring the highest accuracy.

You need the most advanced reasoning capabilities available.

Your use case demands cutting-edge AI performance.

Choose Qwen2.5 Instruct 32B if...

You are developing at scale where operational costs are critical.

You prioritize cost-effectiveness over maximum performance.

Your workload requires consistent, reliable performance.

Explore all Best picks Use the AI Selector for a tailored recommendation

Your Questions about the Cogito v2.1 (Reasoning) vs Qwen2.5 Instruct 32B Comparison

Review the full evaluation methodology · Read the latest analysis posts

Fonte de dados: https://artificialanalysis.ai/