Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Mistral Nemo vs Qwen2.5 72B Instruct

Mistral Nemo costs 2.7x less per output token than Qwen2.5 72B Instruct ($0.15 vs $0.40 per million). Updated October 21, 2026; 3 benchmarks have a result for both.

Mistral NemoMistral AI
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.15
0
Qwen2.5 72B InstructQwen
Coding
No data
Overall
7.7
Output $/M
$0.40
3
vs boards won of 3 shared

Mistral Nemo or Qwen2.5 72B Instruct: which to pick

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

Pick Mistral Nemo for output tokens 2.7x cheaper ($0.15 vs $0.40 per million) and a larger context window (131K against 33K tokens).

Shared results
3
Mistral Nemo only
0
Qwen2.5 72B Instruct only
50
Like-for-like categories
3 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
Mistral Nemo not benchmarked, Qwen2.5 72B Instruct not benchmarked.
Widest category
Knowledge, 20.0 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
MMLU: Mistral Nemo 65.3% against Qwen2.5 72B Instruct 85.3%, 20.0 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Mistral Nemo $0.15 against Qwen2.5 72B Instruct $0.40 per million output tokens, 2.7x apart.
Context window
Mistral Nemo takes 131K tokens, Qwen2.5 72B Instruct 33K.

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
CategoryMistral NemoBarsQwen2.5 72B InstructTies
Intelligence01
Knowledge01
General01
All shared boards03
CodingDirectional onlySix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index5 boards, none shared
Coding benchmarks for Mistral Nemo and Qwen2.5 72B Instruct
BenchmarkMistral NemoQwen2.5 72B InstructLeader
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured27.6%Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured4.5%Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
WeirdMLNot measured16.0%Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: codingNot measured1292Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: software and ITNot measured1292Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
Neither model has a result on the other 33 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Intelligence benchmarks for Mistral Nemo and Qwen2.5 72B Instruct
BenchmarkMistral NemoQwen2.5 72B InstructLeader
AA Intelligence IndexNot measured7.7Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
Epoch Capabilities Index118.7129.0Qwen2.5 72B Instruct
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index4 boards, none shared
Agentic work benchmarks for Mistral Nemo and Qwen2.5 72B Instruct
BenchmarkMistral NemoQwen2.5 72B InstructLeader
τ²-Bench TelecomNot measured34.5%Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
METR time horizonsNot measured35.8%Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
BALROGNot measured16.2%Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
TheAgentCompanyNot measured5.7%Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
Neither model has a result on the other 35 boards here
ReasoningDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index7 boards, none shared
Reasoning benchmarks for Mistral Nemo and Qwen2.5 72B Instruct
BenchmarkMistral NemoQwen2.5 72B InstructLeader
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured49.1%Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured3.6%Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)Not measured49.1%Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
BIG-Bench HardNot measured79.8%Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: hard promptsNot measured1271Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: expertNot measured1245Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts in EnglishNot measured1279Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
Neither model has a result on the other 14 boards here
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index6 boards, none shared
Math benchmarks for Mistral Nemo and Qwen2.5 72B Instruct
BenchmarkMistral NemoQwen2.5 72B InstructLeader
AA Math IndexNot measured14.0Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured14.0%Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
OTIS Mock AIMENot measured8.1%Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
MATH level 5Not measured63.2%Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: mathNot measured1283Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: mathematical workNot measured1290Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
Neither model has a result on the other 7 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Knowledge benchmarks for Mistral Nemo and Qwen2.5 72B Instruct
BenchmarkMistral NemoQwen2.5 72B InstructLeader
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured72.0%Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
MMLU65.3%85.3%Qwen2.5 72B Instruct
AI2 Reasoning ChallengeNot measured94.5%Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: scienceNot measured1275Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcareNot measured1258Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: legal and governmentNot measured1288Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: business and financeNot measured1253Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
Neither model has a result on the other 10 boards here
Web designNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for Mistral Nemo and Qwen2.5 72B Instruct
BenchmarkMistral NemoQwen2.5 72B InstructLeader
Neither model has a result on 9 boards here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
General benchmarks for Mistral Nemo and Qwen2.5 72B Instruct
BenchmarkMistral NemoQwen2.5 72B InstructLeader
IFBenchNot measured36.9%Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
DTBench48.6%62.9%Qwen2.5 72B Instruct
LMCANot measured13.4%Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
HellaSwagNot measured84.8%Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
WinoGrandeNot measured82.3%Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
PIQANot measured82.6%Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
LMArena TextNot measured1269Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: instruction followingNot measured1254Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: creative writingNot measured1221Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: EnglishNot measured1283Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: non-EnglishNot measured1252Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: ChineseNot measured1273Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: GermanNot measured1234Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: JapaneseNot measured1180Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: KoreanNot measured1188Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: FrenchNot measured1280Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: SpanishNot measured1255Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: RussianNot measured1264Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: multi-turnNot measured1272Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: longer queriesNot measured1281Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: writing and languageNot measured1247Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: entertainment and mediaNot measured1211Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
Neither model has a result on the other 24 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for Mistral Nemo and Qwen2.5 72B Instruct
BenchmarkMistral NemoQwen2.5 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

Mistral Nemo$0.0002Fits in one request
Qwen2.5 72B Instruct$0.0006Fits in one request

Mistral Nemo costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Mistral Nemo$0.0080Fits in one request
Qwen2.5 72B Instruct$0.019Exceeds the context window

Mistral Nemo costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Mistral Nemo$0.032Exceeds the context window
Qwen2.5 72B Instruct$0.076Exceeds the context window

Mistral Nemo 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 Mistral Nemo and Qwen2.5 72B Instruct
SpecificationMistral NemoQwen2.5 72B Instruct
MakerMistral AIQwen
WeightsOpen weightsOpen weights
ReleasedJuly 19, 2024September 19, 2024
Context window131K33K
Input $/Mtok$0.15$0.36
Output $/Mtok$0.15$0.40
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it00
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Mistral Nemo better than Qwen2.5 72B Instruct for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Mistral Nemo for output tokens 2.7x cheaper ($0.15 vs $0.40 per million) and a larger context window (131K against 33K tokens).

Which is cheaper, Mistral Nemo or Qwen2.5 72B Instruct?

Mistral Nemo costs $0.15 per million input tokens and $0.15 per million output tokens; Qwen2.5 72B Instruct costs $0.36 and $0.40. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, Mistral Nemo or Qwen2.5 72B Instruct?

Mistral Nemo, with 131K tokens against 33K.

How many benchmarks is the Mistral Nemo vs Qwen2.5 72B Instruct comparison based on?

3 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. Mistral Nemo's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and Qwen2.5 72B Instruct's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next