Model comparison
Qwen1.5-72B vs Solar Pro4
Solar Pro4 is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.1 to 30.8 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 17 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)
UpstageSummary
- They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. Qwen1.5-72B scores higher in 0 categories and Solar Pro4 in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Solar Pro4 leads 39.8 to 11.5.
- Qwen1.5-72B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Qwen1.5-72B | Solar Pro4 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | Upstage |
| Noometry Index | 30.8 | 42.1 |
| Released | 2024-02-04 | 2026-08-06 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | — | 524K |
| Max output | — | 131K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.30 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $1.20 |
| Results tracked | 22 | 18 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Solar Pro4 leads
Qwen1.5-72B: 31.9 (#277), Solar Pro4: 40.1 (#149)
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-72B | Solar Pro4 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1165 | 1437 |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1371 |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 33.2% | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 40.3% | — |
| HumanEval+ | 59.1% | — |
| MBPP+ | 61.6% | — |
Reasoning Solar Pro4 leads
Qwen1.5-72B: 22.2 (#203), Solar Pro4: 28.5 (#104)
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-72B | Solar Pro4 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1148 | 1399 |
Math Solar Pro4 leads
Qwen1.5-72B: 33.2 (#205), Solar Pro4: 38.8 (#128)
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-72B | Solar Pro4 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1164 | 1416 |
Knowledge Solar Pro4 leads
Qwen1.5-72B: 11.5 (#300), Solar Pro4: 39.8 (#129)
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-72B | Solar Pro4 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1136 | 1427 |
| GPQA Diamond | 28.8% | — |
Multilingual Solar Pro4 leads
Qwen1.5-72B: 33.2 (#253), Solar Pro4: 48.7 (#139)
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-72B | Solar Pro4 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1135 | 1361 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1186 | 1415 |
| LMArena French | 1159 | 1397 |
| LMArena German | 1084 | 1364 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1061 | 1309 |
| LMArena Korean | 1050 | 1382 |
| LMArena Russian | 1104 | 1360 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1110 | 1401 |
Instruction Following Solar Pro4 leads
Qwen1.5-72B: 59.3 (#256), Solar Pro4: 72.7 (#132)
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-72B | Solar Pro4 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1141 | 1377 |
Long Context Solar Pro4 leads
Qwen1.5-72B: 35.1 (#243), Solar Pro4: 42.1 (#130)
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-72B | Solar Pro4 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1157 | 1381 |
Writing & Preference Solar Pro4 leads
Qwen1.5-72B: 37.3 (#258), Solar Pro4: 56.5 (#138)
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-72B | Solar Pro4 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1166 | 1386 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1137 | 1316 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1160 | 1385 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Qwen1.5-72B better than Solar Pro4?
Solar Pro4 is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.1 to 30.8 on the Noometry Index.
Is Qwen1.5-72B or Solar Pro4 better for coding?
Solar Pro4 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 40.1 versus 31.9 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Qwen1.5-72B and Solar Pro4 share?
17 benchmarks have published results for both models. Qwen1.5-72B has 22 scored results on Noometry and Solar Pro4 has 18.