Sonar Pro vs Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct
Updated October 21, 2026. No benchmark has tested both models yet. Coding is ranked on the Vibe Coding Index; every other board is shown as published.
- Coding
- No data
- Overall
- 7.6
- Output $/M
- $15.00
- Coding
- No data
- Overall
- No data
- Output $/M
- $1.00
Decision reading
Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.
Sonar Pro has the edge where the context window is larger, 200K against 128K tokens.
No benchmark has tested both yet. Sonar Pro has results on LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run), AA Intelligence Index and GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run); Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct on OSWorld, GeoBench and LMArena Vision. Compare them on price and context instead.
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.
Coding
Vibe Coding Index, six public coding benchmarks
No call
Neither has a coding score yet.
One side not measured
Intelligence
AA Intelligence Index
No call
Only Sonar Pro has a AA Intelligence Index result, 7.6.
Directional only
Long documents
Listed context window
Sonar Pro
Sonar Pro takes 200K tokens against 128K.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct
Sonar Pro $0.011, Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct $0.0013 per turn.
List prices
At a glance
- Coding index
- Sonar Pro not benchmarked, Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct not benchmarked.
- Widest category
- None yet: no category has been tested on both models.
- Widest single gap
- None yet: no benchmark has tested both models.
- Output price
- Sonar Pro $15.00 against Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct $1.00 per million output tokens, 15.0x apart.
- Context window
- Sonar Pro takes 200K tokens, Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct 128K.
Benchmark by benchmark
Every board either model has a result on, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale. Only one model is measured on each, so no row names a leader.
CodingDirectional onlySix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index1 board measured
| Benchmark | Sonar Pro | Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run) | 27.5% | Not measured | Only Sonar Pro measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 37 boards here | |||
IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board measured
| Benchmark | Sonar Pro | Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | 7.6 | Not measured | Only Sonar Pro measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here | |||
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board measured
| Benchmark | Sonar Pro | Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| OSWorld | Not measured | 5.0% | Only Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 38 boards here | |||
ReasoningDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards measured
| Benchmark | Sonar Pro | Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) | 57.8% | Not measured | Only Sonar Pro measured |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run) | 6.6% | Not measured | Only Sonar Pro measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 19 boards here | |||
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards measured
| Benchmark | Sonar Pro | Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run) | 75.5% | Not measured | Only Sonar Pro measured |
| GeoBench | Not measured | 62.0% | Only Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 15 boards here | |||
GeneralDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index3 boards measured
| Benchmark | Sonar Pro | Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | Not measured | 1107 | Only Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct measured |
| LMArena Vision: English | Not measured | 1115 | Only Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct measured |
| LMArena Vision: Chinese | Not measured | 1107 | Only Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 43 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
Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct costs less
Repository review
50K input + 3K output tokens
Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct costs less
Agent loop
200K input + 10K output tokens
Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct 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.
| Specification | Perplexity Sonar Pro | Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | Perplexity | Qwen |
| Weights | No public weights listed | Open weights |
| Released | March 7, 2025 | February 1, 2025 |
| Context window | 200K | 128K |
| Input $/Mtok | $3.00 | $0.80 |
| Output $/Mtok | $15.00 | $1.00 |
| Coding index | Not benchmarked | Not benchmarked |
| Independent measurements behind it | 0 | 0 |
| Cost per solved task | Not computable | Not computable |
| Source | OpenRouter listing | OpenRouter listing |
Questions
Is Sonar Pro better than Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct for coding?
Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Sonar Pro has the edge where the context window is larger, 200K against 128K tokens.
Which is cheaper, Sonar Pro or Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct?
Sonar Pro costs $3.00 per million input tokens and $15.00 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, Sonar Pro or Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct?
Sonar Pro, with 200K tokens against 128K.
Has any benchmark tested both Sonar Pro and Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct?
No benchmark has tested both yet. Sonar Pro has results on LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run), AA Intelligence Index and GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run); Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct on OSWorld, GeoBench and LMArena Vision. Compare them on price and context instead. Data as of October 21, 2026.