Side-by-side comparison
Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct vs Relace Apply 3
Qwen
Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct
Input / 1M
$0.6600
Output / 1M
$1.0000
| Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct | Relace Apply 3 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Qwen | Relace |
| Context window Maximum tokens (input + output) the model can process in a single request. Glossary → | 32,768 | 256,000 |
| Capabilities Optional capabilities the model advertises: vision (images), tools (function calling), json_mode (structured output). | text-only | text-only |
| Input $ / 1M tokens Cost for tokens you send (prompt + context). Cheaper side highlighted. Glossary → | 0.6600 | 0.8500 |
| Output $ / 1M tokens Cost for tokens the model generates. Output is normally 3–5× pricier than input. Glossary → | 1.0000 | 1.2500 |
Frequently asked questions
Which is cheaper, Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct or Relace Apply 3?
Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct is cheaper than Relace Apply 3 on a 50/50 input/output blend by about $0.22 per 1M tokens. Exact savings depend on your input-vs-output ratio — use the cost calculator on this page for a workload-specific estimate.
Which has a larger context window, Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct or Relace Apply 3?
Relace Apply 3 has the larger context window at 256k tokens versus 33k tokens for Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct. That means Relace Apply 3 can ingest about 7.8x as much text per request.
What is the difference between Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct and Relace Apply 3?
Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct comes from Qwen; Relace Apply 3 comes from Relace. They differ in pricing, context window, and supported capabilities — see the side-by-side table on this page for the exact figures, refreshed nightly.