Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GPT-4.1 Nano vs Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct

GPT-4.1 Nano costs 2.5x less per output token than Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct ($0.40 vs $1.00 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 3 benchmarks have a result for both.

GPT-4.1 NanoOpenAI
Coding
No data
Overall
24.7
Output $/M
$0.40
0
Qwen2.5 VL 72B InstructQwen
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$1.00
3
vs boards won of 3 shared

GPT-4.1 Nano or Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct: which to pick

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick GPT-4.1 Nano for output tokens 2.5x cheaper ($0.40 vs $1.00 per million) and a larger context window (1.05M against 128K tokens).

Shared results
3
GPT-4.1 Nano only
68
Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct only
3
Like-for-like categories
2 of 9

Only benchmarks that tested both models count toward a pick; a result only one model has is shown but not compared.

Which one for your work

Each card is decided by one number both models carry. Where only one has it, the card says so and makes no call.

At a glance

Coding index
GPT-4.1 Nano not benchmarked, Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct not benchmarked.
Widest category
General, 4.9 points apart on average over 2 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
LMArena Vision: GPT-4.1 Nano 1063 against Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct 1107, 7.4 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
GPT-4.1 Nano $0.40 against Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct $1.00 per million output tokens, 2.5x apart.
Context window
GPT-4.1 Nano takes 1.05M tokens, Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct 128K.

Benchmark by benchmark

First the score: boards each model leads, per category, where both have a result. Then every board, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale, so compare the two in a row, not one row with another.

Boards won, where both have a result
CategoryGPT-4.1 NanoBarsQwen2.5 VL 72B InstructTies
Reasoning01
General02
All shared boards03
CodingDirectional onlySix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index8 boards, none shared
Coding benchmarks for GPT-4.1 Nano and Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct
BenchmarkGPT-4.1 NanoQwen2.5 VL 72B InstructLeader
Aider polyglot8.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
AA Coding Index11.1Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)42.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)32.6%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)3.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
WeirdML19.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
LMArena Text: coding1306Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
LMArena Text: software and IT1305Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
Neither model has a result on the other 35 boards here
IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards, none shared
Intelligence benchmarks for GPT-4.1 Nano and Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct
BenchmarkGPT-4.1 NanoQwen2.5 VL 72B InstructLeader
AA Intelligence Index7.8Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
Epoch Capabilities Index129.5Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index3 boards, none shared
Agentic work benchmarks for GPT-4.1 Nano and Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct
BenchmarkGPT-4.1 NanoQwen2.5 VL 72B InstructLeader
τ²-Bench Telecom17.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
OSWorldNot measured5.0%Only Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct measured
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL)33.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
Neither model has a result on the other 39 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Reasoning benchmarks for GPT-4.1 Nano and Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct
BenchmarkGPT-4.1 NanoQwen2.5 VL 72B InstructLeader
GPQA Diamond50.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
MMMU Pro (Vals AI)55.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)51.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)3.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)48.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
ARC-AGI0.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
ARC-AGI-20.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
Chess puzzles0.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts1286Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
LMArena Text: expert1271Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English1293Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
Kagi LLM Benchmark33.3%36.0%Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct
Neither model has a result on the other 11 boards here
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index9 boards, none shared
Math benchmarks for GPT-4.1 Nano and Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct
BenchmarkGPT-4.1 NanoQwen2.5 VL 72B InstructLeader
AIME26.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
MATH 500 (Vals AI)80.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
MGSM (Vals AI)69.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
AA Math Index24.0Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)24.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
OTIS Mock AIME28.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
MATH level 570.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
LMArena Text: math1274Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
LMArena Text: mathematical work1274Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
Neither model has a result on the other 5 boards here
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index13 boards, none shared
Knowledge benchmarks for GPT-4.1 Nano and Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct
BenchmarkGPT-4.1 NanoQwen2.5 VL 72B InstructLeader
MMLU Pro63.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
LegalBench (Vals AI)61.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)42.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
TaxEval (Vals AI)60.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
MortgageTax (Vals AI)52.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
MedQA (Vals AI)68.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)65.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
SimpleQA Verified6.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
GeoBenchNot measured62.0%Only Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: science1297Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare1276Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
LMArena Text: legal and government1300Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
LMArena Text: business and finance1267Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
Neither model has a result on the other 7 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index6 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for GPT-4.1 Nano and Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct
BenchmarkGPT-4.1 NanoQwen2.5 VL 72B InstructLeader
Design Arena: websites973Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
Design Arena: UI components913Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
Design Arena: game dev970Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
Design Arena: data viz891Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
Design Arena: 3D924Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
Design Arena: all code categories962Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
Neither model has a result on the other 3 boards here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
General benchmarks for GPT-4.1 Nano and Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct
BenchmarkGPT-4.1 NanoQwen2.5 VL 72B InstructLeader
IFBench32.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)20.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
DTBench52.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
LMCA5.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
Fiction.LiveBench25.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
LMArena Text1285Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
LMArena Text: instruction following1266Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
LMArena Text: creative writing1260Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
LMArena Vision10631107Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct
LMArena Text: English1303Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
LMArena Text: non-English1260Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
LMArena Text: Chinese1270Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
LMArena Text: German1288Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
LMArena Text: Japanese1198Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
LMArena Text: Russian1261Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn1277Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
LMArena Text: longer queries1283Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
LMArena Text: writing and language1261Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
LMArena Text: entertainment and media1243Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
LMArena Vision: English11011115Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct
LMArena Vision: ChineseNot measured1107Only Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct measured
Neither model has a result on the other 27 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for GPT-4.1 Nano and Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct
BenchmarkGPT-4.1 NanoQwen2.5 VL 72B InstructLeader
Neither model has a result on 5 boards here

What each workload costs

Three fixed token mixes at each model's listed price, so per-token rates become a bill.

Chat turn

1K input + 500 output tokens

GPT-4.1 Nano$0.0003Fits in one request
Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct$0.0013Fits in one request

GPT-4.1 Nano costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GPT-4.1 Nano$0.0062Fits in one request
Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct$0.043Fits in one request

GPT-4.1 Nano costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GPT-4.1 Nano$0.024Fits in one request
Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct$0.170Exceeds the context window

GPT-4.1 Nano costs less

Listed OpenRouter rates, without cache or batch discounts. A workload that does not fit a model's context window would need splitting.

Specification differences

The leading value in a row is marked; a row with a missing value names no leader. Our two rows are marked in red.

Specifications of GPT-4.1 Nano and Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct
SpecificationOpenAI GPT-4.1 NanoQwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct
MakerOpenAIQwen
WeightsNo public weights listedOpen weights
ReleasedApril 14, 2025February 1, 2025
Context window1.05M128K
Input $/Mtok$0.10$0.80
Output $/Mtok$0.40$1.00
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it00
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GPT-4.1 Nano better than Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick GPT-4.1 Nano for output tokens 2.5x cheaper ($0.40 vs $1.00 per million) and a larger context window (1.05M against 128K tokens).

Which is cheaper, GPT-4.1 Nano or Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct?

GPT-4.1 Nano costs $0.10 per million input tokens and $0.40 per million output tokens; Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct costs $0.80 and $1.00. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, GPT-4.1 Nano or Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct?

GPT-4.1 Nano, with 1.05M tokens against 128K.

How many benchmarks is the GPT-4.1 Nano vs Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct comparison based on?

3 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. GPT-4.1 Nano's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next