Model comparison
Claude 3.5 Sonnet vs Qwen2.5 72B Instruct
Claude 3.5 Sonnet is the stronger model overall, scoring 34.4 to 31.5 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 36 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 36 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude 3.5 Sonnet scores higher in 8 categories and Qwen2.5 72B Instruct in 1 category; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in agentic & tool use, where Claude 3.5 Sonnet leads 32.1 to 22.0.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is WeirdML: 40% for Claude 3.5 Sonnet and 16% for Qwen2.5 72B Instruct.
- Qwen2.5 72B Instruct has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Claude 3.5 Sonnet | Qwen2.5 72B Instruct | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 34.4 | 31.5 |
| Released | 2024-06-20 | 2024-09 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | — | 131K |
| Max output | — | 8K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $1.40 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $5.60 |
| Results tracked | 60 | 43 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Claude 3.5 Sonnet leads
Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 39.5 (#145), Qwen2.5 72B Instruct: 32.8 (#256)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | Qwen2.5 72B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| WeirdML | 40% | 16% |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 46.8% | 45.8% |
| LMArena Coding | 1343 | 1293 |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 58.6% | 55.9% |
| Aider Polyglot | 51.6% | — |
| GSO | 4.6% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 67.1% | — |
| CadEval | 48% | — |
| HumanEval+ | 81.7% | — |
| MBPP+ | 74.3% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Claude 3.5 Sonnet leads
Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 32.1 (#61), Qwen2.5 72B Instruct: 22.0 (#124)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | Qwen2.5 72B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| TheAgentCompany | 24% | 5.7% |
| BALROG | 32.6% | 16.2% |
| METR Time Horizons | 45.2% | 35.8% |
| Cybench | 17.5% | — |
Reasoning Claude 3.5 Sonnet leads
Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 22.5 (#176), Qwen2.5 72B Instruct: 21.4 (#197)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | Qwen2.5 72B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1305 | 1271 |
| DTBench | 67.8% | 62.9% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 133.55 | 129.01 |
| ForecastBench | 60.7 | 57.5 |
| SimpleBench | 41.4% | — |
| EnigmaEval | 0.9% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 56.7% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 55% | — |
| LMCA | — | 13.4% |
| BIG-Bench Hard | — | 79.8% |
| HellaSwag | — | 84.8% |
| LiveBench | 59% | — |
| PIQA | — | 82.6% |
| WinoGrande | — | 82.3% |
Math Too close to call
Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 18.0 (#282), Qwen2.5 72B Instruct: 18.1 (#281)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | Qwen2.5 72B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 8.5% | 8.1% |
| Omni-MATH | 27.6% | 33% |
| LMArena Math | 1306 | 1283 |
| MATH Level 5 | 56.9% | 63.2% |
| LiveBench Math | 52.3% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 2.1% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 0% | — |
Knowledge Claude 3.5 Sonnet leads
Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 28.5 (#236), Qwen2.5 72B Instruct: 26.9 (#247)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | Qwen2.5 72B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 55.3% | 49.1% |
| MMLU-Pro | 77.7% | 63.1% |
| Confabulations | 19.9% | 19.1% |
| GPQA (HELM) | 56.5% | 42.6% |
| LMArena Expert | 1264 | 1245 |
| MMLU | 87.3% | 85.3% |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 4.1% | — |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | — | 94.5% |
| TriviaQA | — | 71.9% |
Multimodal Not comparable
Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 26.0 (#115), Qwen2.5 72B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | Qwen2.5 72B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1125 | — |
| Video-MME | 60% | — |
| GeoBench | 62% | — |
| VPCT | 33% | — |
Multilingual Claude 3.5 Sonnet leads
Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 43.4 (#180), Qwen2.5 72B Instruct: 41.2 (#208)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | Qwen2.5 72B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1283 | 1252 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1271 | 1272 |
| LMArena French | 1304 | 1279 |
| LMArena German | 1297 | 1234 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1234 | 1180 |
| LMArena Korean | 1200 | 1188 |
| LMArena Russian | 1305 | 1264 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1289 | 1255 |
Instruction Following Claude 3.5 Sonnet leads
Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 69.0 (#177), Qwen2.5 72B Instruct: 65.7 (#216)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | Qwen2.5 72B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| IFEval | 85.5% | 80.6% |
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1297 | 1254 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 69.3% | — |
Long Context Too close to call
Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 39.9 (#162), Qwen2.5 72B Instruct: 38.9 (#183)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | Qwen2.5 72B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1311 | 1282 |
Writing & Preference Claude 3.5 Sonnet leads
Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 53.0 (#159), Qwen2.5 72B Instruct: 46.9 (#210)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | Qwen2.5 72B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1298 | 1269 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1292 | 1221 |
| WildBench | 79.2% | 80.2% |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1326 | 1272 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 80.3% | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1451 | — |
| LiveBench Language | 53.8% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Claude 3.5 Sonnet better than Qwen2.5 72B Instruct?
Claude 3.5 Sonnet is the stronger model overall, scoring 34.4 to 31.5 on the Noometry Index.
Is Claude 3.5 Sonnet or Qwen2.5 72B Instruct better for coding?
Claude 3.5 Sonnet scores higher on coding benchmarks: 39.5 versus 32.8 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Claude 3.5 Sonnet and Qwen2.5 72B Instruct share?
36 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude 3.5 Sonnet has 60 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5 72B Instruct has 43.