Model Comparison
Qwen2.5 Instruct 72B
vs. Qwen3.7 Max
Comparing 2 AI models · 12 benchmarks · Alibaba
Recommended Pick
AlQwen3.7 Max10 metric winsStrongest on: Throughput, Reasoning, Intelligence
Best Value
Qwen2.5 Instruct 72B
100.0 value score
27.5 reasoning / $0.48/1M
Lowest Price
Qwen2.5 Instruct 72B
$0.47/1M input price
Best Reasoning
Qwen3.7 Max
58.8 reasoning score
Blends available reasoning benchmarks
Best for Coding
Qwen3.7 Max
66.0 coding index
Composite Indices
Higher is better; speed and price are normalized
Standard Benchmarks
Only benchmarks with data are shown
Differences That Matter
Best value
Qwen2.5 Instruct 72B has the strongest quality-to-price mix at 100.0 out of 100 value points.
Price gap
Qwen2.5 Instruct 72B is 5.3x cheaper on input tokens than Qwen3.7 Max.
Reasoning gap
Qwen3.7 Max leads Qwen2.5 Instruct 72B by 31.3 points on reasoning.
Top-pick rationale
Qwen3.7 Max wins 10 measurable categories, including Throughput, Reasoning, Intelligence, GPQA.
Response Face-Off
Run one prompt through the selected models and compare response quality with live speed and cost context.
Qwen2.5 Instruct 72B
Alibaba
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Qwen3.7 Max
Alibaba
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Which answer was more useful?
Chat with leading AI models
Use Claude, ChatGPT, Gemini alongside with EU-Hosted Models like Deepseek, Qwen & Kimi.
EU-hosted inference
Servers in Germany & Finland. Designed to meet strict GDPR and ISO 27001 compliance requirements.
Full Comparison
| Metric | Al Qwen2.5 Instruct 72B | Top Pick Al Qwen3.7 Max |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input Cost | $0.47/1M | $2.50/1M |
| Output Cost | $0.49/1M | $7.50/1M |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.48/1M | $3.75/1M |
| Specifications | ||
| Organization | Alibaba | Alibaba |
| Release Date | Sep 19, 2024 | May 19, 2026 |
| Performance & Speed | ||
| Throughput | — | 200.4 tok/s |
| TTFT | — | 1661ms |
| Latency | — | 13683ms |
| Composite Indices | ||
| Value Score | 100.0 | 27.3 |
| Reasoning Score | 27.5 | 58.8 |
| Intelligence | 9.6 | 46.0 |
| Coding | — | 66.0 |
| Math | 14.0 | — |
| Standard Benchmarks | ||
| GPQA | 49.1% | 92.3% |
| MMLU Pro | 72.0% | — |
| HLE | 4.2% | 38.1% |
| LiveCodeBench | 27.6% | — |
| MATH 500 | 85.8% | — |
| AIME 2025 | 14.0% | — |
| AIME (Original) | 16.0% | — |
| SciCode | 26.7% | 48.8% |
| LCR | 20.3% | 69.0% |
| IFBench | 36.9% | 80.5% |
| TAU-bench v2 | 34.5% | 94.7% |
| TerminalBench Hard | 4.5% | 50.8% |
Key Takeaways
Qwen2.5 Instruct 72B offers the best value at $0.47/1M,making it ideal for high-volume applications and cost-conscious projects.
Qwen3.7 Max has the strongest reasoning profile with a 58.8 reasoning score,combining the available reasoning-heavy benchmarks.
Qwen3.7 Max reaches a 66.0 coding index,making it the top choice for software development and code generation tasks.
All models support context windows of ∞+ tokens,suitable for processing lengthy documents and maintaining extended conversations.
When to Choose Each Model
Qwen2.5 Instruct 72B
- Cost-sensitive applications
- High-volume processing
Qwen3.7 Max
- Complex reasoning tasks
- Research & analysis
- Code generation
- Software development
