Model comparison
Phi-3.5-mini vs Qwen2-72B
Qwen2-72B has enough public results to be ranked (#294); Phi-3.5-mini does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.
Last verified . 2 shared benchmarks.
Microsoft
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 2 benchmarks with published results for both. Phi-3.5-mini scores higher in 1 category and Qwen2-72B in 0 categories; one gap is clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in coding, where Phi-3.5-mini leads 34.0 to 28.7.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is BigCodeBench Complete: 38.5% for Phi-3.5-mini and 54% for Qwen2-72B.
Side by side
| Phi-3.5-mini | Qwen2-72B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Microsoft | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 36.4 | 29.5 |
| Released | 2024-08-16 | 2024-06-07 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | — | — |
| Max output | — | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Results tracked | 5 | 26 |
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: 34.0 (#231), Qwen2-72B: 28.7 (#303)
| Benchmark | Phi-3.5-mini | Qwen2-72B |
|---|---|---|
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 32.8% | 38.5% |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 38.5% | 54% |
| WeirdML | — | 11.3% |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1196 |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Phi-3.5-mini: —, Qwen2-72B: 16.9 (#138)
| Benchmark | Phi-3.5-mini | Qwen2-72B |
|---|---|---|
| TheAgentCompany | — | 1.1% |
| METR Time Horizons | — | 29.9% |
Reasoning Not comparable
Phi-3.5-mini: —, Qwen2-72B: 22.2 (#184)
| Benchmark | Phi-3.5-mini | Qwen2-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1191 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 125.27 |
| PIQA | 81% | — |
Math Not comparable
Phi-3.5-mini: —, Qwen2-72B: 27.9 (#232)
| Benchmark | Phi-3.5-mini | Qwen2-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | — | 1235 |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 39.1% |
| GSM8K | 86.2% | — |
Knowledge Not comparable
Phi-3.5-mini: —, Qwen2-72B: 21.2 (#270)
| Benchmark | Phi-3.5-mini | Qwen2-72B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 40.8% |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1171 |
| BoolQ | 78% | — |
| MMLU | — | 82.4% |
Multilingual Not comparable
Phi-3.5-mini: —, Qwen2-72B: 36.0 (#239)
| Benchmark | Phi-3.5-mini | Qwen2-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1176 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1240 |
| LMArena French | — | 1169 |
| LMArena German | — | 1151 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1111 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1083 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1169 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1168 |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Phi-3.5-mini: —, Qwen2-72B: 62.0 (#236)
| Benchmark | Phi-3.5-mini | Qwen2-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1181 |
Long Context Not comparable
Phi-3.5-mini: —, Qwen2-72B: 36.1 (#230)
| Benchmark | Phi-3.5-mini | Qwen2-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1193 |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Phi-3.5-mini: —, Qwen2-72B: 41.0 (#236)
| Benchmark | Phi-3.5-mini | Qwen2-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1203 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1181 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1195 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Phi-3.5-mini better than Qwen2-72B?
Qwen2-72B has enough public results to be ranked (#294); Phi-3.5-mini does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.
Is Phi-3.5-mini or Qwen2-72B better for coding?
Phi-3.5-mini scores higher on coding benchmarks: 34.0 versus 28.7 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Phi-3.5-mini and Qwen2-72B share?
2 benchmarks have published results for both models. Phi-3.5-mini has 5 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2-72B has 26.