Solar Pro 2 vs Qwen2.5 7B Instruct
Qwen2.5 7B Instruct comes out ahead, 62 to 51 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.
UpstageSolar Pro 2
51/100- ECI—
- Price$0.25 / $0.25
- Context66K
- Our pick
Alibaba (Qwen)Qwen2.5 7B Instruct
62/100- ECI118.5
- Price$0.05 / $0.10
- Context131K
Add a model
Make it a three-way comparison.
Qwen2.5 7B Instruct is our pick
Qwen2.5 7B Instruct is the better all-round choice, scoring 62/100 against Solar Pro 2 (51). It leads on price and context window. Solar Pro 2 wins on inputs & features. 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 7B InstructQwen2.5 7B Instruct $0.063 · Solar Pro 2 $0.25 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextQwen2.5 7B InstructQwen2.5 7B Instruct 131,072 · Solar Pro 2 65,536 tokens
- Widest inputsSame inputsSolar Pro 2: Text · Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: Text
- Self-hostingQwen2.5 7B InstructPublishes downloadable weights (Apache 2.0)
| Measure | Weight | Solar Pro 2 | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|---|
| Price | 50% | 75 | 100 |
| Inputs & features | 30% | 35 | 25 |
| Context window | 20% | 12 | 25 |
| Overall | 100% | 51/100 | 62/100 |
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 | Solar Pro 2Upstage | Qwen2.5 7B InstructAlibaba (Qwen) |
|---|---|---|
| Capability | ||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | 118.5 |
| ECI rank | — | #159 of 165 |
| GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions | — | 35.5% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics | — | 2.5% |
| Price per million tokens | ||
| Input | $0.25 | $0.05 (best) |
| Output | $0.25 | $0.10 (best) |
| Cached input | — | — |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.25 | $0.063 (best) |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Official Upstage API | Median of 3 providers |
| Limits | ||
| Context window | 65,536 tokens | 131,072 tokens (best) |
| Max output | 8,192 tokens | 8,192 tokens |
| Inputs and features | ||
| Text | Yes | Yes |
| Images | No | No |
| PDFs | No | No |
| Audio | No | No |
| Video | No | No |
| Reasoning | Yesminimal · high | No |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | No | No |
| Availability | ||
| Weights | Proprietary | OpenApache 2.0 |
| API model ID | solar-pro2 | — |
| API providers | 2 | 4 (best) |
| Released | May 20, 2025 | Sep 19, 2024 |
| Knowledge cutoff | Mar 2025 | — |
What would a month cost?
Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.
- Solar Pro 2$3.00
- Qwen2.5 7B Instruct$0.70
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Solar Pro 2 or Qwen2.5 7B Instruct?
Qwen2.5 7B Instruct is the better all-round choice, scoring 62/100 against Solar Pro 2 (51). It leads on price and context window. Solar Pro 2 wins on inputs & features. 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, Solar Pro 2 or Qwen2.5 7B Instruct?
Qwen2.5 7B Instruct is cheaper at $0.05 input / $0.10 output per million tokens (median across 3 API providers). Solar Pro 2 costs $0.25 input / $0.25 output per million tokens (official Upstage API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.063 per million tokens for Qwen2.5 7B Instruct versus $0.25 for Solar Pro 2 (4× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
There is no independent benchmark that covers both models yet. Solar Pro 2 has not been scored yet and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct has an ECI of 118.5.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Solar Pro 2 and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. Both support tool calling for agent workflows.
Which has the bigger context window?
Qwen2.5 7B Instruct has the largest context window at 131,072 tokens, against 65,536 for Solar Pro 2. Maximum output per response: Solar Pro 2 up to 8,192, Qwen2.5 7B Instruct up to 8,192 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Solar Pro 2 accepts text; Qwen2.5 7B Instruct accepts text. They handle the same number of input types.
Are any of these open source?
Qwen2.5 7B Instruct publishes its weights (Apache 2.0) and can be self-hosted; Solar Pro 2 is proprietary.
Which is newer?
Solar Pro 2 is the newest, released May 20, 2025. Qwen2.5 7B Instruct came out Sep 19, 2024. Knowledge cutoff: Solar Pro 2 Mar 2025.
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 Nov 2, 2026.
Related comparisons
- Add Gemini 2.5 Flash-LiteThree-way comparison
- Solar Pro 2 vs Gemini 2.5 Flash-LiteGoogle
- Solar Pro 2 vs SabaMistral AI
- Solar Pro 2 vs Qwen3 VL 30B A3B InstructAlibaba (Qwen)
- Solar Pro 2 vs Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49B v1.5NVIDIA
- Qwen2.5 7B Instruct vs Llama-3.1-8B-InstructMeta · ECI 116.4
- Qwen2.5 7B Instruct vs Mistral NemoMistral AI · ECI 118.6
