GPT-4o vs Sonar Pro vs Qwen2.5 72B Instruct
GPT-4o comes out ahead, 35 to 28 and 20 on our weighted score, though Qwen2.5 72B Instruct is 44% cheaper per token.
- Our pick
OpenAIGPT-4o
35/100- ECI129.0
- Price$2.50 / $10.00
- Context128K
PerplexitySonar Pro
20/100- ECI—
- Price$3.00 / $15.00
- Context200K
Alibaba (Qwen)Qwen2.5 72B Instruct
28/100- ECI129.0
- Price$1.40 / $5.60
- Context131K
GPT-4o is our pick
GPT-4o is the better all-round choice, scoring 35/100 against Qwen2.5 72B Instruct (28) and Sonar Pro (20). It leads on inputs & features. Sonar Pro wins on context window. Qwen2.5 72B Instruct wins on price. The score weighs price 50%, inputs & features 30%, context window 20%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.
- CapabilityNot enough dataNo independent benchmark covers every model here yet
- Lowest priceQwen2.5 72B InstructQwen2.5 72B Instruct $2.45 · GPT-4o $4.38 · Sonar Pro $6.00 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextSonar ProSonar Pro 200,000 · Qwen2.5 72B Instruct 131,072 · GPT-4o 128,000 tokens
- Widest inputsGPT-4oGPT-4o: Text, Images, PDFs · Sonar Pro: Text, Images · Qwen2.5 72B Instruct: Text
- Self-hostingQwen2.5 72B InstructPublishes downloadable weights
| Measure | Weight | GPT-4o | Sonar Pro | Qwen2.5 72B Instruct |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Price | 50% | 19 | 13 | 31 |
| Inputs & features | 30% | 70 | 25 | 25 |
| Context window | 20% | 24 | 32 | 24 |
| Overall | 100% | 35/100 | 20/100 | 28/100 |
Left out because at least one model lacks the data: capability. The remaining weights were rescaled.
Every spec in one table
Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.
| Specification | GPT-4oOpenAI | Sonar ProPerplexity | Qwen2.5 72B InstructAlibaba (Qwen) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | |||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | 129.0 | — | 129.0 (best) |
| ECI rank | #129 of 148 | — | #128 of 148 (best) |
| GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions | 48.9% | — | 49.2% (best) |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics | 6.3% | — | 8.1% (best) |
| Price per million tokens | |||
| Input | $2.50 | $3.00 | $1.40 (best) |
| Output | $10.00 | $15.00 | $5.60 (best) |
| Cached input | $1.25 | — | — |
| Blended (3:1) | $4.38 | $6.00 | $2.45 (best) |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Official OpenAI API | Official Perplexity API | Official Alibaba API |
| Limits | |||
| Context window | 128,000 tokens | 200,000 tokens (best) | 131,072 tokens |
| Max output | 16,384 tokens (best) | 8,192 tokens | 8,192 tokens |
| Inputs and features | |||
| Text | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Images | Yes | Yes | No |
| PDFs | Yes | No | No |
| Audio | No | No | No |
| Video | No | No | No |
| Reasoning | No | No | No |
| Tool calling | Yes | No | Yes |
| Structured output | Yes | No | No |
| Availability | |||
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary | Open |
| API model ID | gpt-4o | sonar-pro | qwen2-5-72b-instruct |
| API providers | 19 (best) | 5 | 1 |
| Released | May 13, 2024 | Jan 1, 2024 | Sep 19, 2024 |
| Knowledge cutoff | Sep 2023 | Sep 1, 2025 | Apr 2024 |
What would a month cost?
Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.
- GPT-4o$45.00
- Sonar Pro$60.00
- Qwen2.5 72B Instruct$25.20
Which should you choose?
Which is better: GPT-4o, Sonar Pro or Qwen2.5 72B Instruct?
GPT-4o is the better all-round choice, scoring 35/100 against Qwen2.5 72B Instruct (28) and Sonar Pro (20). It leads on inputs & features. Sonar Pro wins on context window. Qwen2.5 72B Instruct wins on price. The score weighs price 50%, inputs & features 30%, context window 20%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.
Which is cheaper, GPT-4o, Sonar Pro or Qwen2.5 72B Instruct?
Qwen2.5 72B Instruct is cheaper at $1.40 input / $5.60 output per million tokens (official Alibaba API price). GPT-4o costs $2.50 input / $10.00 output per million tokens (official OpenAI API price); Sonar Pro costs $3.00 input / $15.00 output per million tokens (official Perplexity API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $2.45 per million tokens for Qwen2.5 72B Instruct versus $4.38 for GPT-4o (1.8× as much) and $6.00 for Sonar Pro (2.4× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
There is no independent benchmark that covers all three models yet. GPT-4o has an ECI of 129.0, Sonar Pro has not been scored yet and Qwen2.5 72B Instruct has an ECI of 129.0.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for GPT-4o, Sonar Pro and Qwen2.5 72B Instruct yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. Note that Sonar Pro does not support tool calling, which most coding agents need.
Which has the bigger context window?
Sonar Pro has the largest context window at 200,000 tokens, against 131,072 for Qwen2.5 72B Instruct and 128,000 for GPT-4o. Maximum output per response: GPT-4o up to 16,384, Sonar Pro up to 8,192, Qwen2.5 72B Instruct up to 8,192 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
GPT-4o accepts text, images and PDFs; Sonar Pro accepts text and images; Qwen2.5 72B Instruct accepts text. GPT-4o handles the widest range of inputs.
Are any of these open source?
Qwen2.5 72B Instruct publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; GPT-4o and Sonar Pro is proprietary.
Which is newer?
Qwen2.5 72B Instruct is the newest, released Sep 19, 2024. GPT-4o came out May 13, 2024; Sonar Pro came out Jan 1, 2024. Knowledge cutoff: GPT-4o Sep 2023, Sonar Pro Sep 1, 2025, Qwen2.5 72B Instruct Apr 2024.
How do you decide the winner?
Each model gets a 0–100 score on capability (50%, independent benchmark results); price (25%, blended price per million tokens (3 input : 1 output), log scale); inputs & features (15%, image, PDF, audio and video input, tool calling, structured output and reasoning); context window (10%, maximum tokens per request, log scale). Dimensions missing for any model are dropped and the remaining weights rescaled, so every model is judged on the same evidence. Specs and prices come from public model listings and the labs’ own API pages; capability scores come from independent benchmark runs. Data updated Oct 4, 2026.
