Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning vs Qwen2.5 72B Instruct

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning leads Qwen2.5 72B Instruct on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 12.9 to 7.7, and Nemotron 3.5 Lightning costs 2.7x less per output token ($0.147 vs $0.40 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 3 benchmarks have a result for both.

Nemotron 3.5 LightningNVIDIA
Coding
22.6
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.147
3
Qwen2.5 72B InstructQwen
Coding
No data
Overall
26.5
Output $/M
$0.40
0
vs boards won of 3 shared

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning or Qwen2.5 72B Instruct: which to pick

Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning has a coding score, 22.6 on the Vibe Coding Index; Qwen2.5 72B Instruct has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Compare them on price, context and the boards below.

Shared results
3
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning only
17
Qwen2.5 72B Instruct only
50
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
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 22.6 from 2 benchmarks, Qwen2.5 72B Instruct not benchmarked.
Widest category
Reasoning, 16.1 points apart on average over 2 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run): Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 74.3% against Qwen2.5 72B Instruct 49.1%, 25.2 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning $0.147 against Qwen2.5 72B Instruct $0.40 per million output tokens, 2.7x apart.
Context window
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning takes 262K 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
CategoryNemotron 3.5 LightningBarsQwen2.5 72B InstructTies
Intelligence10
Reasoning20
All shared boards30
CodingDirectional onlySix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index14 boards, none shared
Coding benchmarks for Nemotron 3.5 Lightning and Qwen2.5 72B Instruct
BenchmarkNemotron 3.5 LightningQwen2.5 72B InstructLeader
AA Coding Index26.8Not measuredOnly Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)52.8%Not measuredOnly Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)0.0%Not measuredOnly Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured
Code migration (Vals AI)3.0%Not measuredOnly Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured
ProgramBench (Vals AI)0.0%Not measuredOnly Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals AI)10.9%Not measuredOnly Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured
CyberBench (Vals AI)29.5%Not measuredOnly Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured27.6%Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
SciCode32.1%Not measuredOnly Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 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
ALE-Bench769.2Not measuredOnly Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 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 29 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Intelligence benchmarks for Nemotron 3.5 Lightning and Qwen2.5 72B Instruct
BenchmarkNemotron 3.5 LightningQwen2.5 72B InstructLeader
AA Intelligence Index12.97.7Nemotron 3.5 Lightning
Epoch Capabilities IndexNot measured129.0Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index9 boards, none shared
Agentic work benchmarks for Nemotron 3.5 Lightning and Qwen2.5 72B Instruct
BenchmarkNemotron 3.5 LightningQwen2.5 72B InstructLeader
AA Agentic Index3.5Not measuredOnly Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured
Finance Agent (Vals AI)18.5%Not measuredOnly Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured
Tax Agent Bench (Vals AI)2.6%Not measuredOnly Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured
Legal Research Bench (Vals AI)2.9%Not measuredOnly Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured
Excel Modeling Benchmark (Vals AI)17.0%Not measuredOnly Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured
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 33 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
Reasoning benchmarks for Nemotron 3.5 Lightning and Qwen2.5 72B Instruct
BenchmarkNemotron 3.5 LightningQwen2.5 72B InstructLeader
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)74.3%49.1%Nemotron 3.5 Lightning
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)10.6%3.6%Nemotron 3.5 Lightning
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 16 boards here
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index6 boards, none shared
Math benchmarks for Nemotron 3.5 Lightning and Qwen2.5 72B Instruct
BenchmarkNemotron 3.5 LightningQwen2.5 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 8 boards here
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index8 boards, none shared
Knowledge benchmarks for Nemotron 3.5 Lightning and Qwen2.5 72B Instruct
BenchmarkNemotron 3.5 LightningQwen2.5 72B InstructLeader
CorpFin (Vals AI)54.2%Not measuredOnly Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured72.0%Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
MMLUNot measured85.3%Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
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 12 boards here
Web designNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for Nemotron 3.5 Lightning and Qwen2.5 72B Instruct
BenchmarkNemotron 3.5 LightningQwen2.5 72B InstructLeader
Neither model has a result on 9 boards here
GeneralDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index24 boards, none shared
General benchmarks for Nemotron 3.5 Lightning and Qwen2.5 72B Instruct
BenchmarkNemotron 3.5 LightningQwen2.5 72B InstructLeader
MedScribe (Vals AI)4.3%Not measuredOnly Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured
IFBenchNot measured36.9%Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)60.3%Not measuredOnly Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured
DTBenchNot measured62.9%Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
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 Nemotron 3.5 Lightning and Qwen2.5 72B Instruct
BenchmarkNemotron 3.5 LightningQwen2.5 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

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning$0.0001Fits in one request
Qwen2.5 72B Instruct$0.0006Fits in one request

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning$0.0031Fits in one request
Qwen2.5 72B Instruct$0.019Exceeds the context window

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning$0.012Fits in one request
Qwen2.5 72B Instruct$0.076Exceeds the context window

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 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 Nemotron 3.5 Lightning and Qwen2.5 72B Instruct
SpecificationNVIDIA Nemotron 3.5 LightningQwen2.5 72B Instruct
MakerNVIDIAQwen
WeightsOpen weightsOpen weights
ReleasedAugust 11, 2026September 19, 2024
Context window262K33K
Input $/Mtok$0.0534$0.36
Output $/Mtok$0.147$0.40
Coding index22.6Not benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it20
Cost per solved task$0.06Not computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Nemotron 3.5 Lightning better than Qwen2.5 72B Instruct for coding?

Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning has a coding score, 22.6 on the Vibe Coding Index; Qwen2.5 72B Instruct has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Compare them on price, context and the boards below.

Which is cheaper, Nemotron 3.5 Lightning or Qwen2.5 72B Instruct?

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning costs $0.0534 per million input tokens and $0.147 per million output tokens; Qwen2.5 72B Instruct costs $0.36 and $0.40. Cost per solved task is known for Nemotron 3.5 Lightning only.

Which has the bigger context window, Nemotron 3.5 Lightning or Qwen2.5 72B Instruct?

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning, with 262K tokens against 33K.

How many benchmarks is the Nemotron 3.5 Lightning vs Qwen2.5 72B Instruct comparison based on?

3 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. Nemotron 3.5 Lightning's coding index rests on 2 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