# Claude 3.7 Sonnet vs Qwen2.5 72B Instruct

> Claude 3.7 Sonnet is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.5 to 31.9 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/claude-3-7-sonnet-vs-qwen2-5-72b-instruct
- Last updated: 2026-10-12
- Shared benchmarks: 30

## Summary

- They share 30 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude 3.7 Sonnet scores higher in 8 categories and Qwen2.5 72B Instruct in 1 category; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Claude 3.7 Sonnet leads 37.5 to 19.3.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 57.8% for Claude 3.7 Sonnet and 8.1% for Qwen2.5 72B Instruct.
- Qwen2.5 72B Instruct has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | Claude 3.7 Sonnet | Qwen2.5 72B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 39.5 | 31.9 |
| Rank | 164 | 267 |
| Context | — | 131K |
| Input $/M | — | $1.40 |
| Output $/M | — | $5.60 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |

## Coding

- Claude 3.7 Sonnet: 40.6 (#136)
- Qwen2.5 72B Instruct: 33.2 (#260)

| Benchmark | Claude 3.7 Sonnet | Qwen2.5 72B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1361 | 1292 |
| SWE-bench Verified | 61% | — |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 52.8% | — |
| Aider Polyglot | 64.9% | — |
| GSO | 3.8% | — |
| WeirdML | — | 16% |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 45.8% |
| LiveBench Coding | 74.5% | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 55.9% |
| CadEval | 54% | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Claude 3.7 Sonnet: 34.1 (#50)
- Qwen2.5 72B Instruct: 22.1 (#133)

| Benchmark | Claude 3.7 Sonnet | Qwen2.5 72B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| TheAgentCompany | 30.9% | 5.7% |
| METR Time Horizons | 60% | 35.8% |
| Cybench | 20% | — |
| DeepResearch Bench | 43.6% | — |
| OSWorld | 35.8% | — |
| BALROG | — | 16.2% |

## Reasoning

- Claude 3.7 Sonnet: 18.6 (#277)
- Qwen2.5 72B Instruct: 22.3 (#199)

| Benchmark | Claude 3.7 Sonnet | Qwen2.5 72B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1333 | 1271 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 141.16 | 129 |
| ForecastBench | 61.8 | 57.5 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 0.9% | — |
| SimpleBench | 46.4% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 28.6% | — |
| EnigmaEval | 4.2% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 87.8% | — |
| DTBench | — | 62.9% |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 74% | — |
| LMCA | — | 13.4% |
| BIG-Bench Hard | — | 79.8% |
| HellaSwag | — | 84.8% |
| LiveBench | 76.1% | — |
| PIQA | — | 82.6% |
| WinoGrande | — | 82.3% |

## Math

- Claude 3.7 Sonnet: 37.5 (#153)
- Qwen2.5 72B Instruct: 19.3 (#287)

| Benchmark | Claude 3.7 Sonnet | Qwen2.5 72B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 57.8% | 8.1% |
| Omni-MATH | 33% | 33% |
| LMArena Math | 1337 | 1283 |
| MATH Level 5 | 91.2% | 63.2% |
| LiveBench Math | 79% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 4.1% | — |

## Knowledge

- Claude 3.7 Sonnet: 39.8 (#130)
- Qwen2.5 72B Instruct: 27.0 (#253)

| Benchmark | Claude 3.7 Sonnet | Qwen2.5 72B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 79.7% | 49.1% |
| MMLU-Pro | 78.4% | 63.1% |
| Confabulations | 14.7% | 19.1% |
| GPQA (HELM) | 60.8% | 42.6% |
| LMArena Expert | 1321 | 1245 |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 8% | — |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | — | 94.5% |
| MMLU | — | 85.3% |
| TriviaQA | — | 71.9% |

## Multimodal

- Claude 3.7 Sonnet: 33.7 (#95)
- Qwen2.5 72B Instruct: —

| Benchmark | Claude 3.7 Sonnet | Qwen2.5 72B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1169 | — |
| GeoBench | 68% | — |
| VPCT | 39% | — |
| SpatialViz-Bench | 33.9% | — |

## Multilingual

- Claude 3.7 Sonnet: 44.1 (#179)
- Qwen2.5 72B Instruct: 41.0 (#213)

| Benchmark | Claude 3.7 Sonnet | Qwen2.5 72B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1296 | 1252 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1299 | 1272 |
| LMArena French | 1303 | 1280 |
| LMArena German | 1301 | 1234 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1267 | 1180 |
| LMArena Korean | 1249 | 1188 |
| LMArena Russian | 1311 | 1264 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1298 | 1256 |

## Instruction Following

- Claude 3.7 Sonnet: 72.9 (#125)
- Qwen2.5 72B Instruct: 65.5 (#221)

| Benchmark | Claude 3.7 Sonnet | Qwen2.5 72B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| IFEval | 83.4% | 80.6% |
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1352 | 1254 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 81.3% | — |

## Long Context

- Claude 3.7 Sonnet: 50.3 (#10)
- Qwen2.5 72B Instruct: 38.9 (#188)

| Benchmark | Claude 3.7 Sonnet | Qwen2.5 72B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1373 | 1282 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | 83.3% | — |

## Writing & Preference

- Claude 3.7 Sonnet: 54.4 (#150)
- Qwen2.5 72B Instruct: 46.7 (#215)

| Benchmark | Claude 3.7 Sonnet | Qwen2.5 72B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1314 | 1269 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1332 | 1221 |
| WildBench | 81.4% | 80.2% |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1339 | 1272 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 81.1% | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1412 | — |
| LiveBench Language | 59.9% | — |

## FAQ

### Is Claude 3.7 Sonnet better than Qwen2.5 72B Instruct?

Claude 3.7 Sonnet is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.5 to 31.9 on the Noometry Index.

### Is Claude 3.7 Sonnet or Qwen2.5 72B Instruct better for coding?

Claude 3.7 Sonnet scores higher on coding benchmarks: 40.6 versus 33.2 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do Claude 3.7 Sonnet and Qwen2.5 72B Instruct share?

30 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude 3.7 Sonnet has 58 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5 72B Instruct has 43.