Sonar vs Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct
Updated October 21, 2026. 0 benchmarks have a result for both. Coding is ranked on the Vibe Coding Index; every other board is shown as published.
- Coding
- No data
- Overall
- 7.7
- Output $/M
- $1.00
- 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.
Compare them on price, context and the boards below.
- Shared results
- 0
- Sonar only
- 5
- Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct only
- 5
- Like-for-like categories
- 0 of 9
Shared results can support a head-to-head reading. Results only one model has describe coverage, not superiority.
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 has a AA Intelligence Index result, 7.7.
Directional only
Long documents
Listed context window
Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct
Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct takes 128K tokens against 127K.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct
Sonar $0.0015, Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct $0.0013 per turn.
List prices
At a glance
- Coding index
- Sonar not benchmarked, Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct not benchmarked.
- Widest category
- No category has a result for both models.
- Widest single gap
- No benchmark has a result for both models.
- Output price
- Both cost $1.00 per million output tokens.
- Context window
- Sonar takes 127K 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.
CodingDirectional onlySix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index1 board, none shared
| Benchmark | Sonar | Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run) | 29.5% | Not measured | Only Sonar measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 37 boards here | |||
IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board, none shared
| Benchmark | Sonar | Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | 7.7 | Not measured | Only Sonar 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, none shared
| Benchmark | Sonar | 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, none shared
| Benchmark | Sonar | Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) | 47.1% | Not measured | Only Sonar measured |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run) | 4.9% | Not measured | Only Sonar measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 19 boards here | |||
MathNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Sonar | Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Neither model has a result on 13 boards here | |||
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Sonar | Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run) | 68.9% | Not measured | Only Sonar measured |
| GeoBench | Not measured | 62.0% | Only Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 15 boards here | |||
Web designNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Sonar | Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Neither model has a result on 9 boards here | |||
GeneralDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index3 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Sonar | 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 | |||
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Sonar | Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| 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
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 | Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | Perplexity | Qwen |
| Weights | No public weights listed | Open weights |
| Released | January 27, 2025 | February 1, 2025 |
| Context window | 127K | 128K |
| Input $/Mtok | $1.00 | $0.80 |
| Output $/Mtok | $1.00 | $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 better than Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct for coding?
Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Compare them on price, context and the boards below.
Which is cheaper, Sonar or Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct?
Sonar costs $1.00 per million input tokens and $1.00 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 or Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct?
Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct, with 128K tokens against 127K.
How many benchmarks is the Sonar vs Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct comparison based on?
0 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. Sonar'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.