Price Per TokenPrice Per Token
Qwen
Qwen
vs
Qwen
Qwen

Qwen2.5 72B Instruct vs Qwen3.5 397B A17B

A detailed comparison of pricing, benchmarks, and capabilities

Get our weekly newsletter on pricing changes, new releases, and tools.

OpenClaw

Deploy OpenClaw in Under 1 Minute We handle hosting, scaling, and maintenance

Key Takeaways

Qwen2.5 72B Instruct wins:

  • Cheaper input tokens
  • Cheaper output tokens
  • Better at math

Qwen3.5 397B A17B wins:

  • Larger context window
  • Faster response time
  • Higher intelligence benchmark
  • Better at coding
  • Supports vision
Price Advantage
Qwen2.5 72B Instruct
Benchmark Advantage
Qwen3.5 397B A17B
Context Window
Qwen3.5 397B A17B
Speed
Qwen3.5 397B A17B

Pricing Comparison

Benchmark Comparison

Context & Performance

Capabilities

Feature Comparison

FeatureQwen2.5 72B InstructQwen3.5 397B A17B
Vision (Image Input)
Tool/Function Calls
Reasoning Mode
Audio Input
Audio Output
PDF Input
Prompt Caching
Web Search

License & Release

PropertyQwen2.5 72B InstructQwen3.5 397B A17B
LicenseOpen SourceOpen Source
AuthorQwenQwen
ReleasedSep 2024Feb 2026

Qwen2.5 72B Instruct Modalities

Input
text
Output
text

Qwen3.5 397B A17B Modalities

Input
textimagevideo
Output
text

Related Comparisons

Compare Qwen2.5 72B Instruct with:

Compare Qwen3.5 397B A17B with:

Frequently Asked Questions

Qwen2.5 72B Instruct has cheaper input pricing at $0.12/M tokens. Qwen2.5 72B Instruct has cheaper output pricing at $0.39/M tokens.
Qwen3.5 397B A17B scores higher on coding benchmarks with a score of 37.4, compared to Qwen2.5 72B Instruct's score of 11.9.
Qwen2.5 72B Instruct has a 32,768 token context window, while Qwen3.5 397B A17B has a 262,144 token context window.
Qwen2.5 72B Instruct does not support vision. Qwen3.5 397B A17B supports vision.