Model comparison

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview vs Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview is the stronger model overall, scoring 56.7 to 29.9 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 1 shared benchmarks.

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview Google

56.7

Rank #23 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 1 benchmark with published results for both. Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview scores higher in 3 categories and Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct in 0 categories; 3 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads 71.7 to 20.7.
  • Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct is cheaper at $2.80 / $8.40 per million input/output tokens, against $2 / $12 for Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview.
  • Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 131K.
  • Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview and Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct specifications
Gemini 3.1 Pro PreviewQwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct
ProviderGoogleAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index56.729.9
Released2026-02-192024-09
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1.05M131K
Max output66K8K
Input $ / M tokens$2$2.80
Output $ / M tokens$12$8.40
Results tracked716

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding Not comparable

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 42.5 (#99), Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct: —

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Pro PreviewQwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct
SWE-bench Verified75.6%—
DeepSWE11.7%—
LMArena WebDev1447—
SciCode58.9%—
GSO22.6%—
WeirdML72.1%—
LMArena Coding1484—
MirrorCode8.9%—
ALE-Bench1,161—
AlgoTune2.02—

Agentic & Tool Use Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 37.7 (#34), Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct: 18.6 (#144)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Pro PreviewQwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct
Terminal-Bench80.2%—
APEX-Agents35.3%—
τ²-bench Banking26%—
DeepResearch Bench47.8%—
OSWorld—5%
PostTrainBench22%—
BALROG57%—
ExploitBench26.1%—
GBAEval0.8%—
GDP.pdf17%—
LMArena Search1211—
METR Time Horizons77%—
Vending-Bench 23,774—

Reasoning Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 71.7 (#12), Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct: 20.7 (#233)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Pro PreviewQwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct
ARC-AGI-277.1%—
SimpleBench79.6%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark—36%
NYT Connections (extended)97.4%—
ARC-AGI-198%—
CritPt17.7%—
Chess Puzzles55%—
EnigmaEval36.8%—
Thematic Generalization79.4%—
EBR-Bench14.3%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1485—
Mystery Game Puzzles34%—
DTBench97.1%—
LMCA53.8%—
Epoch Capabilities Index154.77—
ForecastBench59—

Math Not comparable

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 62.1 (#34), Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct: —

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Pro PreviewQwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)59.6%—
FrontierMath Tier 426.8%—
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions86.5%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202595.6%—
ProofBench26%—
LMArena Math1485—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)36.9%—
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)16.7%—

Knowledge Not comparable

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 71.8 (#3), Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct: —

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Pro PreviewQwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct
GPQA Diamond94.4%—
Humanity's Last Exam46.4%—
SimpleQA Verified73.5%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate10.4%—
LMArena Expert1485—

Multimodal Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 37.9 (#69), Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct: 33.5 (#97)

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Pro PreviewQwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct
LMArena Vision12961107
Video-MME—73.5%
GeoBench—62%
Blueprint-Bench 226.5%—
Furniture Assembly26.7%—
LMArena Document1444—
SpatialViz-Bench—33.3%

Multilingual Not comparable

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 57.0 (#12), Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct: —

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Pro PreviewQwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct
LMArena Non-English1477—
LMArena Chinese1529—
LMArena French1487—
LMArena German1491—
LMArena Japanese1493—
LMArena Korean1455—
LMArena Russian1498—
LMArena Spanish1479—

Instruction Following Not comparable

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 77.0 (#32), Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct: —

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Pro PreviewQwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct
LMArena Instruction Following1466—

Long Context Not comparable

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 47.4 (#18), Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct: —

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Pro PreviewQwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct
CL-bench20.8%—
CL-bench Life16.9%—
LMArena Longer Query1483—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 66.1 (#37), Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct: —

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Pro PreviewQwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct
LMArena Text1481—
LMArena Creative Writing1482—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1491—
EQ-Bench 41142—
LMArena Multi-Turn1488—

Frequently asked questions

Is Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview better than Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct?

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview is the stronger model overall, scoring 56.7 to 29.9 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview or Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct?

Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct is cheaper. It lists at $2.80 per million input tokens and $8.40 per million output tokens; Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview lists at $2 and $12.

Which has the bigger context window?

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview does, with 1.05M tokens against 131K.

How many benchmarks do Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview and Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct share?

1 benchmark has published results for both models. Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview has 71 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct has 6.

Related comparisons

Go deeper