Price Per TokenPrice Per Token
Qwen
Qwen
vs
Qwen
Qwen

Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct vs Qwen3.5-27B

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 VL 72B Instruct wins:

  • Cheaper output tokens

Qwen3.5-27B wins:

  • Cheaper input tokens
  • Larger context window
  • Faster response time
  • Higher intelligence benchmark
  • Better at coding
Price Advantage
Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct
Benchmark Advantage
Qwen3.5-27B
Context Window
Qwen3.5-27B
Speed
Qwen3.5-27B

Pricing Comparison

Benchmark Comparison

Context & Performance

Capabilities

Feature Comparison

FeatureQwen2.5 VL 72B InstructQwen3.5-27B
Vision (Image Input)
Tool/Function Calls
Reasoning Mode
Audio Input
Audio Output
PDF Input
Prompt Caching
Web Search

License & Release

PropertyQwen2.5 VL 72B InstructQwen3.5-27B
LicenseOpen SourceOpen Source
AuthorQwenQwen
ReleasedFeb 2025Feb 2026

Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct Modalities

Input
textimage
Output
text

Qwen3.5-27B Modalities

Input
textimagevideo
Output
text

Related Comparisons

Compare Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct with:

Compare Qwen3.5-27B with:

Frequently Asked Questions

Qwen3.5-27B has cheaper input pricing at $0.20/M tokens. Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct has cheaper output pricing at $0.80/M tokens.
Qwen3.5-27B scores higher on coding benchmarks with a score of 33.4, compared to Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct's score of N/A.
Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct has a 32,768 token context window, while Qwen3.5-27B has a 262,144 token context window.
Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct supports vision. Qwen3.5-27B supports vision.