Model comparison
GPT-5.4 Pro vs Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct
GPT-5.4 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 58.9 to 29.9 on the Noometry Index. Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct costs 16× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GPT-5.4 Pro's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where GPT-5.4 Pro leads 70.7 to 20.7.
- Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct is cheaper at $2.80 / $8.40 per million input/output tokens, against $30 / $180 for GPT-5.4 Pro.
- GPT-5.4 Pro 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
| GPT-5.4 Pro | Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenAI | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 58.9 | 29.9 |
| Released | 2026-03-05 | 2024-09 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 1.05M | 131K |
| Max output | 128K | 8K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $30 | $2.80 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $180 | $8.40 |
| Results tracked | 16 | 6 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Not comparable
GPT-5.4 Pro: 43.2 (#90), Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 Pro | Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| WeirdML | 57.4% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
GPT-5.4 Pro: —, Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct: 18.6 (#144)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 Pro | Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| OSWorld | — | 5% |
Reasoning GPT-5.4 Pro leads
GPT-5.4 Pro: 70.7 (#13), Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct: 20.7 (#233)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 Pro | Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| ARC-AGI-2 | 83.3% | — |
| SimpleBench | 74.1% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 36% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 94.5% | — |
| CritPt | 30% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 58.6% | — |
| EnigmaEval | 23.8% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 158.93 | — |
Math Not comparable
GPT-5.4 Pro: 72.4 (#22), Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 Pro | Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 82.5% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 58.5% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 50% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 37.5% | — |
Knowledge Not comparable
GPT-5.4 Pro: 68.3 (#7), Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 Pro | Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 94.6% | — |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 44.3% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | 46.3% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 8.3% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
GPT-5.4 Pro: —, Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct: 33.5 (#97)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 Pro | Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1107 |
| Video-MME | — | 73.5% |
| GeoBench | — | 62% |
| SpatialViz-Bench | — | 33.3% |
Frequently asked questions
Is GPT-5.4 Pro better than Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct?
GPT-5.4 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 58.9 to 29.9 on the Noometry Index. Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct costs 16× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GPT-5.4 Pro's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, GPT-5.4 Pro 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; GPT-5.4 Pro lists at $30 and $180.
Which has the bigger context window?
GPT-5.4 Pro does, with 1.05M tokens against 131K.
How many benchmarks do GPT-5.4 Pro and Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. GPT-5.4 Pro has 16 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct has 6.