Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct vs Relace Search
Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct costs 3.0x less per output token than Relace Search ($1.00 vs $3.00 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; no benchmark has tested both models yet.
- Coding
- No data
- Overall
- No data
- Output $/M
- $1.00
- Coding
- No data
- Overall
- No data
- Output $/M
- $3.00
Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct or Relace Search: which to pick
Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.
Pick Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct for output tokens 3.0x cheaper ($1.00 vs $3.00 per million).
No benchmark has tested both yet. Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct has results on OSWorld, Kagi LLM Benchmark and GeoBench; Relace Search has none yet. 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
Long documents
Listed context window
Relace Search
Relace Search takes 256K tokens against 128K.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct
Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct $0.0013, Relace Search $0.0025 per turn.
List prices
At a glance
- Coding index
- Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct not benchmarked, Relace Search 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
- Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct $1.00 against Relace Search $3.00 per million output tokens, 3.0x apart.
- Context window
- Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct takes 128K tokens, Relace Search 256K.
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.
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board measured
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct | Relace Search | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| OSWorld | 5.0% | Not measured | Only Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 40 boards here | |||
ReasoningDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board measured
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct | Relace Search | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 36.0% | Not measured | Only Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 21 boards here | |||
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board measured
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct | Relace Search | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| GeoBench | 62.0% | Not measured | Only Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 17 boards here | |||
GeneralDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index3 boards measured
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct | Relace Search | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1107 | Not measured | Only Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct measured |
| LMArena Vision: English | 1115 | Not measured | Only Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct measured |
| LMArena Vision: Chinese | 1107 | Not measured | 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 | Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct | Relace Search |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | Qwen | Relace |
| Weights | Open weights | No public weights listed |
| Released | February 1, 2025 | December 8, 2025 |
| Context window | 128K | 256K |
| Input $/Mtok | $0.80 | $1.00 |
| Output $/Mtok | $1.00 | $3.00 |
| 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 Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct better than Relace Search for coding?
Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct for output tokens 3.0x cheaper ($1.00 vs $3.00 per million).
Which is cheaper, Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct or Relace Search?
Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct costs $0.80 per million input tokens and $1.00 per million output tokens; Relace Search costs $1.00 and $3.00. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.
Which has the bigger context window, Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct or Relace Search?
Relace Search, with 256K tokens against 128K.
Has any benchmark tested both Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct and Relace Search?
No benchmark has tested both yet. Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct has results on OSWorld, Kagi LLM Benchmark and GeoBench; Relace Search has none yet. Compare them on price and context instead. Data as of October 22, 2026.