# Mistral Nemo vs Qwen2.5 72B Instruct

> Qwen2.5 72B Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 31.5 to 25.9 on the Noometry Index. Mistral Nemo costs 16× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen2.5 72B Instruct's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/mistral-nemo-vs-qwen2-5-72b-instruct
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 6

## Summary

- They share 6 benchmarks with published results for both. Mistral Nemo scores higher in 2 categories and Qwen2.5 72B Instruct in 3 categories; 5 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Qwen2.5 72B Instruct leads 46.9 to 28.6.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is MATH Level 5: 10.8% for Mistral Nemo and 63.2% for Qwen2.5 72B Instruct.
- Mistral Nemo is cheaper at $0.15 / $0.15 per million input/output tokens, against $1.40 / $5.60 for Qwen2.5 72B Instruct.
- Qwen2.5 72B Instruct accepts more context: 131K tokens versus 128K.

## Snapshot

| | Mistral Nemo | Qwen2.5 72B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Mistral AI | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 25.9 | 31.5 |
| Rank | 332 | 259 |
| Context | 128K | 131K |
| Input $/M | $0.15 | $1.40 |
| Output $/M | $0.15 | $5.60 |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- Mistral Nemo: —
- Qwen2.5 72B Instruct: 32.8 (#256)

| Benchmark | Mistral Nemo | Qwen2.5 72B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| WeirdML | — | 16% |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 45.8% |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1293 |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 55.9% |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Mistral Nemo: 23.3 (#118)
- Qwen2.5 72B Instruct: 22.0 (#124)

| Benchmark | Mistral Nemo | Qwen2.5 72B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| BALROG | 17.6% | 16.2% |
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 27.6% | — |
| TheAgentCompany | — | 5.7% |
| METR Time Horizons | — | 35.8% |

## Reasoning

- Mistral Nemo: 19.9 (#230)
- Qwen2.5 72B Instruct: 21.4 (#197)

| Benchmark | Mistral Nemo | Qwen2.5 72B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| DTBench | 48.6% | 62.9% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 118.63 | 129.01 |
| PIQA | 83.5% | 82.6% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1271 |
| LMCA | — | 13.4% |
| BIG-Bench Hard | — | 79.8% |
| ForecastBench | — | 57.5 |
| HellaSwag | — | 84.8% |
| WinoGrande | — | 82.3% |

## Math

- Mistral Nemo: 23.5 (#263)
- Qwen2.5 72B Instruct: 18.1 (#281)

| Benchmark | Mistral Nemo | Qwen2.5 72B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| MATH Level 5 | 10.8% | 63.2% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 8.1% |
| Omni-MATH | — | 33% |
| LMArena Math | — | 1283 |
| GSM8K | 84.2% | — |

## Knowledge

- Mistral Nemo: 12.3 (#293)
- Qwen2.5 72B Instruct: 26.9 (#247)

| Benchmark | Mistral Nemo | Qwen2.5 72B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 29.9% | 49.1% |
| MMLU-Pro | — | 63.1% |
| Confabulations | — | 19.1% |
| GPQA (HELM) | — | 42.6% |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1245 |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | — | 94.5% |
| BoolQ | 82.5% | — |
| MMLU | — | 85.3% |
| TriviaQA | — | 71.9% |

## Multilingual

- Mistral Nemo: —
- Qwen2.5 72B Instruct: 41.2 (#208)

| Benchmark | Mistral Nemo | Qwen2.5 72B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1252 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1272 |
| LMArena French | — | 1279 |
| LMArena German | — | 1234 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1180 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1188 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1264 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1255 |

## Instruction Following

- Mistral Nemo: —
- Qwen2.5 72B Instruct: 65.7 (#216)

| Benchmark | Mistral Nemo | Qwen2.5 72B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| IFEval | — | 80.6% |
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1254 |

## Long Context

- Mistral Nemo: —
- Qwen2.5 72B Instruct: 38.9 (#183)

| Benchmark | Mistral Nemo | Qwen2.5 72B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1282 |

## Writing & Preference

- Mistral Nemo: 28.6 (#291)
- Qwen2.5 72B Instruct: 46.9 (#210)

| Benchmark | Mistral Nemo | Qwen2.5 72B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1269 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1221 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 881 | — |
| WildBench | — | 80.2% |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1272 |

## FAQ

### Is Mistral Nemo better than Qwen2.5 72B Instruct?

Qwen2.5 72B Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 31.5 to 25.9 on the Noometry Index. Mistral Nemo costs 16× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen2.5 72B Instruct's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

### Which is cheaper, Mistral Nemo or Qwen2.5 72B Instruct?

Mistral Nemo is cheaper. It lists at $0.15 per million input tokens and $0.15 per million output tokens; Qwen2.5 72B Instruct lists at $1.40 and $5.60.

### Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen2.5 72B Instruct does, with 131K tokens against 128K.

### How many benchmarks do Mistral Nemo and Qwen2.5 72B Instruct share?

6 benchmarks have published results for both models. Mistral Nemo has 10 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5 72B Instruct has 43.