Battle of the Models

Compare specific LLM models, context windows, and capabilities.

No matches found
VS
No matches found

Qwen 2.5 72B

S-TIER

Hyperbolic

Intelligence Score 91/100
Model Popularity 0 votes
Context Window 32K
Pricing Model Commercial / Paid

Claude 3.5 Sonnet (via routing)

S-TIER

Requesty

Intelligence Score 93/100
Context Window 200K
Pricing Model Commercial / Paid
Model Popularity 0 votes
FINAL VERDICT

Claude 3.5 Sonnet (via routing) Wins

With an intelligence score of 93/100 vs 91/100, Claude 3.5 Sonnet (via routing) outperforms Qwen 2.5 72B by 2 points.

Close Match: The difference is minimal. Consider other factors like pricing and features.
HEAD-TO-HEAD

Detailed Comparison

Feature
Qwen 2.5 72B
Claude 3.5 Sonnet (via routing)
Context Window
32K 200K
Architecture
Transformer (Open Weight) Transformer (Proprietary)
Est. MMLU Score
~85-87% ~88-91%
Release Date
Sep-Nov 2024 Jun-Oct 2024
Pricing Model
Paid / Commercial Paid / Commercial
Rate Limit (RPM)
60 RPM 60 RPM
Daily Limit
Credit-based Credit-based
Capabilities
No specific data
Reasoning
Performance Tier
A-Tier (Excellent) S-Tier (Elite)
Speed Estimate
âš¡ Fast Medium
Primary Use Case
General Purpose General Purpose
Model Size
72B Unknown
Limitations
  • Credits are limited ($1)
  • Decentralized nature may vary latency
  • Billing flow involves crypto/stripe
  • Requires underlying provider API keys
  • Free credit amount is limited
  • Routing adds minimal latency
Key Strengths
  • Verifiable Inference (verified computing)
  • Low Cost due to decentralized compute
  • Privacy focused
  • AI Router: automatic provider failover
  • Prompt caching for cost savings
  • Multi-provider load balancing

Similar Comparisons