Noometry

Model comparison

Qwen Max vs Qwen1.5-72B

Qwen Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 34.7 to 30.8 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 18 shared benchmarks.

Qwen Max Alibaba (Qwen)

34.7

Rank #230 Confirmed

Qwen1.5-72B Alibaba (Qwen)

30.8

Rank #285 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 18 benchmarks with published results for both. Qwen Max scores higher in 6 categories and Qwen1.5-72B in 2 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen Max leads 30.3 to 11.5.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is GPQA Diamond: 56.1% for Qwen Max and 28.8% for Qwen1.5-72B.
  • Qwen1.5-72B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Qwen MaxQwen1.5-72B
ProviderAlibaba (Qwen)Alibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index34.730.8
Released2024-04-032024-02-04
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window33K—
Max output8K—
Input $ / M tokens$1.60—
Output $ / M tokens$6.40—
Results tracked2322

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

Category by category

Coding Qwen1.5-72B leads

Qwen Max: 30.7 (#292), Qwen1.5-72B: 31.9 (#277)

BenchmarkQwen MaxQwen1.5-72B
LMArena Coding12881165
Aider Polyglot21.8%—
BigCodeBench Instruct—33.2%
BigCodeBench Complete—40.3%
HumanEval+—59.1%
MBPP+—61.6%

Reasoning Qwen Max leads

Qwen Max: 25.1 (#151), Qwen1.5-72B: 22.2 (#203)

BenchmarkQwen MaxQwen1.5-72B
LMArena Hard Prompts12691148

Math Qwen1.5-72B leads

Qwen Max: 22.3 (#276), Qwen1.5-72B: 33.2 (#205)

BenchmarkQwen MaxQwen1.5-72B
LMArena Math12751164
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202516.1%—
MATH Level 567.2%—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)1%—

Knowledge Qwen Max leads

Qwen Max: 30.3 (#228), Qwen1.5-72B: 11.5 (#300)

BenchmarkQwen MaxQwen1.5-72B
GPQA Diamond56.1%28.8%
LMArena Expert12481136

Multilingual Qwen Max leads

Qwen Max: 41.8 (#202), Qwen1.5-72B: 33.2 (#253)

BenchmarkQwen MaxQwen1.5-72B
LMArena Non-English12631135
LMArena Chinese12541186
LMArena French13301159
LMArena German12541084
LMArena Japanese12051061
LMArena Korean11421050
LMArena Russian12741104
LMArena Spanish12901110

Instruction Following Qwen Max leads

Qwen Max: 66.5 (#208), Qwen1.5-72B: 59.3 (#256)

BenchmarkQwen MaxQwen1.5-72B
LMArena Instruction Following12621141

Long Context Qwen Max leads

Qwen Max: 39.4 (#180), Qwen1.5-72B: 35.1 (#243)

BenchmarkQwen MaxQwen1.5-72B
LMArena Longer Query12881157
Fiction.LiveBench66.7%—

Writing & Preference Qwen Max leads

Qwen Max: 47.8 (#205), Qwen1.5-72B: 37.3 (#258)

BenchmarkQwen MaxQwen1.5-72B
LMArena Text12821166
LMArena Creative Writing12481137
LMArena Multi-Turn12771160

Frequently asked questions

Is Qwen Max better than Qwen1.5-72B?

Qwen Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 34.7 to 30.8 on the Noometry Index.

Is Qwen Max or Qwen1.5-72B better for coding?

Qwen1.5-72B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 31.9 versus 30.7 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Qwen Max and Qwen1.5-72B share?

18 benchmarks have published results for both models. Qwen Max has 23 scored results on Noometry and Qwen1.5-72B has 22.

Related comparisons

Go deeper