Qwen2.5 72B Instruct vs Qwen-Plus
Qwen2.5 72B Instruct costs 1.9x less per output token than Qwen-Plus ($0.40 vs $0.78 per million). Updated October 21, 2026; 28 benchmarks have a result for both.
Qwen2.5 72B Instruct or Qwen-Plus: which to pick
Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.
Pick Qwen2.5 72B Instruct for output tokens 1.9x cheaper ($0.40 vs $0.78 per million) and work measured by LMArena Text: coding or LMArena Text: software and IT, where it leads.
- Shared results
- 28
- Qwen2.5 72B Instruct only
- 25
- Qwen-Plus only
- 0
- Like-for-like categories
- 5 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.
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 Qwen2.5 72B Instruct has a AA Intelligence Index result, 7.7.
Directional only
Long documents
Listed context window
Qwen-Plus
Qwen-Plus takes 1M tokens against 33K.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Qwen2.5 72B Instruct
Qwen2.5 72B Instruct $0.0006, Qwen-Plus $0.0006 per turn.
List prices
At a glance
- Coding index
- Qwen2.5 72B Instruct not benchmarked, Qwen-Plus not benchmarked.
- Widest category
- Knowledge, 11.7 points apart on average over 4 shared benchmarks.
- Widest single gap
- DTBench: Qwen2.5 72B Instruct 62.9% against Qwen-Plus 81.1%, 18.1 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
- Output price
- Qwen2.5 72B Instruct $0.40 against Qwen-Plus $0.78 per million output tokens, 1.9x apart.
- Context window
- Qwen2.5 72B Instruct takes 33K tokens, Qwen-Plus 1M.
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.
| Category | Qwen2.5 72B Instruct | Bars | Qwen-Plus | Ties |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | 0 | 2 | ||
| Reasoning | 1 | 3 | ||
| Math | 0 | 4 | ||
| Knowledge | 0 | 4 | ||
| General | 0 | 14 | ||
| All shared boards | 1 | 27 |
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index02
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5 72B Instruct | Qwen-Plus | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run) | 27.6% | Not measured | Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured |
| Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) | 4.5% | Not measured | Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured |
| WeirdML | 16.0% | Not measured | Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured |
| LMArena Text: coding | 1292 | 1328 | Qwen-Plus |
| LMArena Text: software and IT | 1292 | 1343 | Qwen-Plus |
| Neither model has a result on the other 34 boards here | |||
IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5 72B Instruct | Qwen-Plus | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | 7.7 | Not measured | Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 129.0 | Not measured | Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured |
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index4 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5 72B Instruct | Qwen-Plus | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| τ²-Bench Telecom | 34.5% | Not measured | Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured |
| METR time horizons | 35.8% | Not measured | Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured |
| BALROG | 16.2% | Not measured | Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured |
| TheAgentCompany | 5.7% | Not measured | Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 37 boards here | |||
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index13
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5 72B Instruct | Qwen-Plus | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) | 49.1% | Not measured | Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run) | 3.6% | Not measured | Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured |
| GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run) | 49.1% | 48.1% | Qwen2.5 72B Instruct |
| BIG-Bench Hard | 79.8% | Not measured | Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts | 1271 | 1317 | Qwen-Plus |
| LMArena Text: expert | 1245 | 1328 | Qwen-Plus |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts in English | 1279 | 1333 | Qwen-Plus |
| Neither model has a result on the other 15 boards here | |||
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index04
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5 72B Instruct | Qwen-Plus | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Math Index | 14.0 | Not measured | Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured |
| AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run) | 14.0% | Not measured | Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured |
| OTIS Mock AIME | 8.1% | 17.8% | Qwen-Plus |
| MATH level 5 | 63.2% | 65.3% | Qwen-Plus |
| LMArena Text: math | 1283 | 1326 | Qwen-Plus |
| LMArena Text: mathematical work | 1290 | 1332 | Qwen-Plus |
| Neither model has a result on the other 7 boards here | |||
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index04
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5 72B Instruct | Qwen-Plus | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run) | 72.0% | Not measured | Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured |
| MMLU | 85.3% | Not measured | Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured |
| AI2 Reasoning Challenge | 94.5% | Not measured | Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured |
| LMArena Text: science | 1275 | 1352 | Qwen-Plus |
| LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare | 1258 | 1350 | Qwen-Plus |
| LMArena Text: legal and government | 1288 | 1349 | Qwen-Plus |
| LMArena Text: business and finance | 1253 | 1303 | Qwen-Plus |
| Neither model has a result on the other 11 boards here | |||
Web designNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5 72B Instruct | Qwen-Plus | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Neither model has a result on 9 boards here | |||
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index014
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5 72B Instruct | Qwen-Plus | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| IFBench | 36.9% | Not measured | Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured |
| DTBench | 62.9% | 81.1% | Qwen-Plus |
| LMCA | 13.4% | 24.0% | Qwen-Plus |
| HellaSwag | 84.8% | Not measured | Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured |
| WinoGrande | 82.3% | Not measured | Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured |
| PIQA | 82.6% | Not measured | Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured |
| LMArena Text | 1269 | 1326 | Qwen-Plus |
| LMArena Text: instruction following | 1254 | 1303 | Qwen-Plus |
| LMArena Text: creative writing | 1221 | 1292 | Qwen-Plus |
| LMArena Text: English | 1283 | 1339 | Qwen-Plus |
| LMArena Text: non-English | 1252 | 1310 | Qwen-Plus |
| LMArena Text: Chinese | 1273 | 1347 | Qwen-Plus |
| LMArena Text: German | 1234 | Not measured | Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured |
| LMArena Text: Japanese | 1180 | 1251 | Qwen-Plus |
| LMArena Text: Korean | 1188 | Not measured | Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured |
| LMArena Text: French | 1280 | Not measured | Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured |
| LMArena Text: Spanish | 1255 | Not measured | Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured |
| LMArena Text: Russian | 1264 | 1323 | Qwen-Plus |
| LMArena Text: multi-turn | 1272 | 1336 | Qwen-Plus |
| LMArena Text: longer queries | 1281 | 1324 | Qwen-Plus |
| LMArena Text: writing and language | 1247 | 1296 | Qwen-Plus |
| LMArena Text: entertainment and media | 1211 | 1270 | Qwen-Plus |
| 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
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5 72B Instruct | Qwen-Plus | 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 72B Instruct costs less
Repository review
50K input + 3K output tokens
Qwen-Plus costs less
Agent loop
200K input + 10K output tokens
Qwen-Plus 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 | Qwen2.5 72B Instruct | Qwen-Plus |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | Qwen | Qwen |
| Weights | Open weights | No public weights listed |
| Released | September 19, 2024 | February 1, 2025 |
| Context window | 33K | 1M |
| Input $/Mtok | $0.36 | $0.26 |
| Output $/Mtok | $0.40 | $0.78 |
| 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 Qwen2.5 72B Instruct better than Qwen-Plus for coding?
Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Qwen2.5 72B Instruct for output tokens 1.9x cheaper ($0.40 vs $0.78 per million) and work measured by LMArena Text: coding or LMArena Text: software and IT, where it leads.
Which is cheaper, Qwen2.5 72B Instruct or Qwen-Plus?
Qwen2.5 72B Instruct costs $0.36 per million input tokens and $0.40 per million output tokens; Qwen-Plus costs $0.26 and $0.78. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.
Which has the bigger context window, Qwen2.5 72B Instruct or Qwen-Plus?
Qwen-Plus, with 1M tokens against 33K.
How many benchmarks is the Qwen2.5 72B Instruct vs Qwen-Plus comparison based on?
28 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. Qwen2.5 72B Instruct's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and Qwen-Plus's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.