ZMIME
Comparison · 2 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

Qwen2.5 72B Instruct vs Claude Haiku 3.5

Claude Haiku 3.5 comes out ahead, 49 to 43 on our weighted score.

  1. Alibaba (Qwen)

    Qwen2.5 72B Instruct

    Released Sep 19, 2024

    43/100
    • ECI129.0
    • Price$1.40 / $5.60
    • Context131K
    Full specs Remove Qwen2.5 72B Instruct
  2. Our pick

    Anthropic

    Claude Haiku 3.5

    Released Oct 22, 2024

    49/100
    • ECI127.2
    • Price—
    • Context200K
    Full specs Remove Claude Haiku 3.5

  3. Add a model

    Make it a three-way comparison.

01 — Verdict

Claude Haiku 3.5 is our pick

Claude Haiku 3.5 is the better all-round choice, scoring 49/100 against Qwen2.5 72B Instruct (43). It leads on inputs & features and context window. Qwen2.5 72B Instruct wins on capability. The score weighs capability 67%, inputs & features 20%, context window 13%.

  • CapabilityQwen2.5 72B InstructCapabilities Index (ECI): Qwen2.5 72B Instruct 129.0 · Claude Haiku 3.5 127.2
  • Lowest priceQwen2.5 72B InstructQwen2.5 72B Instruct $2.45 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend) · Claude Haiku 3.5 unpriced
  • Longest contextClaude Haiku 3.5Claude Haiku 3.5 200,000 · Qwen2.5 72B Instruct 131,072 tokens
  • Widest inputsClaude Haiku 3.5Qwen2.5 72B Instruct: Text · Claude Haiku 3.5: Text, Images, PDFs
  • Self-hostingQwen2.5 72B InstructPublishes downloadable weights
How the score is built
MeasureWeightQwen2.5 72B InstructClaude Haiku 3.5
CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI)67%5249
Inputs & features20%2560
Context window13%2432
Overall100%43/10049/100

Left out because at least one model lacks the data: price. The remaining weights were rescaled.

02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.

Qwen2.5 72B Instruct vs Claude Haiku 3.5 specifications side by side
SpecificationQwen2.5 72B InstructAlibaba (Qwen)Claude Haiku 3.5Anthropic
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)129.0 (best)127.2
ECI rank#128 of 148 (best)#134 of 148
GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions49.2% (best)38.1%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics8.1% (best)4.3%
Price per million tokens
Input$1.40—
Output$5.60—
Cached input——
Blended (3:1)$2.45—
Long-context rateSame rate—
Price sourceOfficial Alibaba API—
Limits
Context window131,072 tokens200,000 tokens (best)
Max output8,192 tokens8,192 tokens
Inputs and features
TextYesYes
ImagesNoYes
PDFsNoYes
AudioNoNo
VideoNoNo
ReasoningNoNo
Tool callingYesYes
Structured outputNoNo
Availability
WeightsOpenProprietary
API model IDqwen2-5-72b-instruct—
API providers1—
ReleasedSep 19, 2024Oct 22, 2024
Knowledge cutoffApr 2024Jul 31, 2024
03 — Cost

What would a month cost?

Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.

  • Qwen2.5 72B Instruct$25.20
  • Claude Haiku 3.5—
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Qwen2.5 72B Instruct or Claude Haiku 3.5?

Claude Haiku 3.5 is the better all-round choice, scoring 49/100 against Qwen2.5 72B Instruct (43). It leads on inputs & features and context window. Qwen2.5 72B Instruct wins on capability. The score weighs capability 67%, inputs & features 20%, context window 13%.

Which is cheaper, Qwen2.5 72B Instruct or Claude Haiku 3.5?

Qwen2.5 72B Instruct is cheaper at $1.40 input / $5.60 output per million tokens (official Alibaba 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 . Claude Haiku 3.5 has no published per-token price.

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

Qwen2.5 72B Instruct scores higher on the Capabilities Index (ECI): Qwen2.5 72B Instruct 129.0 (#128 of 148) and Claude Haiku 3.5 127.2 (#134 of 148). The confidence ranges of the top two overlap (123.8–130.7 vs 120.7–129.7), so treat the gap as small. On individual benchmarks: GPQA Diamond — Qwen2.5 72B Instruct 49.2%, Claude Haiku 3.5 38.1%; OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025 — Qwen2.5 72B Instruct 8.1%, Claude Haiku 3.5 4.3%.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Qwen2.5 72B Instruct and Claude Haiku 3.5 yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. On overall capability, Qwen2.5 72B Instruct leads, which tends to carry over to coding, but test on your own codebase. Both support tool calling for agent workflows.

Which has the bigger context window?

Claude Haiku 3.5 has the largest context window at 200,000 tokens, against 131,072 for Qwen2.5 72B Instruct. Maximum output per response: Qwen2.5 72B Instruct up to 8,192, Claude Haiku 3.5 up to 8,192 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Qwen2.5 72B Instruct accepts text; Claude Haiku 3.5 accepts text, images and PDFs. Claude Haiku 3.5 handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

Qwen2.5 72B Instruct publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; Claude Haiku 3.5 is proprietary.

Which is newer?

Claude Haiku 3.5 is the newest, released Oct 22, 2024. Qwen2.5 72B Instruct came out Sep 19, 2024. Knowledge cutoff: Qwen2.5 72B Instruct Apr 2024, Claude Haiku 3.5 Jul 31, 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.

05 — Keep comparing

Related comparisons