Model comparison

Phi-3.5-mini vs Qwen2.5 72B Instruct

Qwen2.5 72B Instruct has enough public results to be ranked (#267); Phi-3.5-mini does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.

Last verified . 3 shared benchmarks.

Phi-3.5-mini Microsoft

36.9

Unranked Sparse

Qwen2.5 72B Instruct Alibaba (Qwen)

31.9

Rank #267 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 3 benchmarks with published results for both. Phi-3.5-mini scores higher in 1 category and Qwen2.5 72B Instruct in 0 categories; one gap is clear of the uncertainty.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is BigCodeBench Complete: 38.5% for Phi-3.5-mini and 55.9% for Qwen2.5 72B Instruct.

Side by side

Phi-3.5-mini and Qwen2.5 72B Instruct specifications
Phi-3.5-miniQwen2.5 72B Instruct
ProviderMicrosoftAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index36.931.9
Released2024-08-162024-09
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window—131K
Max output—8K
Input $ / M tokens—$1.40
Output $ / M tokens—$5.60
Results tracked543

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

Category by category

Coding Phi-3.5-mini leads

Phi-3.5-mini: 34.6 (#232), Qwen2.5 72B Instruct: 33.2 (#260)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkPhi-3.5-miniQwen2.5 72B Instruct
BigCodeBench Instruct32.8%45.8%
BigCodeBench Complete38.5%55.9%
WeirdML—16%
LMArena Coding—1292

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Phi-3.5-mini: —, Qwen2.5 72B Instruct: 22.1 (#133)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkPhi-3.5-miniQwen2.5 72B Instruct
TheAgentCompany—5.7%
BALROG—16.2%
METR Time Horizons—35.8%

Reasoning Not comparable

Phi-3.5-mini: —, Qwen2.5 72B Instruct: 22.3 (#199)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkPhi-3.5-miniQwen2.5 72B Instruct
PIQA81%82.6%
LMArena Hard Prompts—1271
DTBench—62.9%
LMCA—13.4%
BIG-Bench Hard—79.8%
Epoch Capabilities Index—129
ForecastBench—57.5
HellaSwag—84.8%
WinoGrande—82.3%

Math Not comparable

Phi-3.5-mini: —, Qwen2.5 72B Instruct: 19.3 (#287)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkPhi-3.5-miniQwen2.5 72B Instruct
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—8.1%
Omni-MATH—33%
LMArena Math—1283
MATH Level 5—63.2%
GSM8K86.2%—

Knowledge Not comparable

Phi-3.5-mini: —, Qwen2.5 72B Instruct: 27.0 (#253)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkPhi-3.5-miniQwen2.5 72B Instruct
GPQA Diamond—49.1%
MMLU-Pro—63.1%
Confabulations—19.1%
GPQA (HELM)—42.6%
LMArena Expert—1245
ARC (AI2) Challenge—94.5%
BoolQ78%—
MMLU—85.3%
TriviaQA—71.9%

Multilingual Not comparable

Phi-3.5-mini: —, Qwen2.5 72B Instruct: 41.0 (#213)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkPhi-3.5-miniQwen2.5 72B Instruct
LMArena Non-English—1252
LMArena Chinese—1272
LMArena French—1280
LMArena German—1234
LMArena Japanese—1180
LMArena Korean—1188
LMArena Russian—1264
LMArena Spanish—1256

Instruction Following Not comparable

Phi-3.5-mini: —, Qwen2.5 72B Instruct: 65.5 (#221)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkPhi-3.5-miniQwen2.5 72B Instruct
IFEval—80.6%
LMArena Instruction Following—1254

Long Context Not comparable

Phi-3.5-mini: —, Qwen2.5 72B Instruct: 38.9 (#188)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkPhi-3.5-miniQwen2.5 72B Instruct
LMArena Longer Query—1282

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Phi-3.5-mini: —, Qwen2.5 72B Instruct: 46.7 (#215)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkPhi-3.5-miniQwen2.5 72B Instruct
LMArena Text—1269
LMArena Creative Writing—1221
WildBench—80.2%
LMArena Multi-Turn—1272

Frequently asked questions

Is Phi-3.5-mini better than Qwen2.5 72B Instruct?

Qwen2.5 72B Instruct has enough public results to be ranked (#267); Phi-3.5-mini does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.

Is Phi-3.5-mini or Qwen2.5 72B Instruct better for coding?

Phi-3.5-mini scores higher on coding benchmarks: 34.6 versus 33.2 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Phi-3.5-mini and Qwen2.5 72B Instruct share?

3 benchmarks have published results for both models. Phi-3.5-mini has 5 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5 72B Instruct has 43.

Related comparisons

Go deeper