Noometry

Model comparison

DeepSeek LLM 67B vs Qwen2.5 72B Instruct

Qwen2.5 72B Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 31.9 to 24.9 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 14 shared benchmarks.

DeepSeek LLM 67B DeepSeek

24.9

Rank #347 Confirmed

Qwen2.5 72B Instruct Alibaba (Qwen)

31.9

Rank #267 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 14 benchmarks with published results for both. DeepSeek LLM 67B scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen2.5 72B Instruct in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen2.5 72B Instruct leads 27.0 to 7.0.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is MATH Level 5: 6.4% for DeepSeek LLM 67B and 63.2% for Qwen2.5 72B Instruct.

Side by side

DeepSeek LLM 67BQwen2.5 72B Instruct
ProviderDeepSeekAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index24.931.9
Released2023-11-292024-09
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window—131K
Max output—8K
Input $ / M tokens—$1.40
Output $ / M tokens—$5.60
Results tracked1543

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding Qwen2.5 72B Instruct leads

DeepSeek LLM 67B: 31.9 (#278), Qwen2.5 72B Instruct: 33.2 (#260)

BenchmarkDeepSeek LLM 67BQwen2.5 72B Instruct
LMArena Coding10961292
WeirdML—16%
BigCodeBench Instruct—45.8%
BigCodeBench Complete—55.9%

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

DeepSeek LLM 67B: —, Qwen2.5 72B Instruct: 22.1 (#133)

BenchmarkDeepSeek LLM 67BQwen2.5 72B Instruct
TheAgentCompany—5.7%
BALROG—16.2%
METR Time Horizons—35.8%

Reasoning Qwen2.5 72B Instruct leads

DeepSeek LLM 67B: 16.5 (#304), Qwen2.5 72B Instruct: 22.3 (#199)

BenchmarkDeepSeek LLM 67BQwen2.5 72B Instruct
LMArena Hard Prompts10701271
Epoch Capabilities Index110.5129
Chess Puzzles0%—
DTBench—62.9%
LMCA—13.4%
BIG-Bench Hard—79.8%
ForecastBench—57.5
HellaSwag—84.8%
PIQA—82.6%
WinoGrande—82.3%

Math Qwen2.5 72B Instruct leads

DeepSeek LLM 67B: 8.7 (#324), Qwen2.5 72B Instruct: 19.3 (#287)

BenchmarkDeepSeek LLM 67BQwen2.5 72B Instruct
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-20250.8%8.1%
LMArena Math11081283
MATH Level 56.4%63.2%
Omni-MATH—33%

Knowledge Qwen2.5 72B Instruct leads

DeepSeek LLM 67B: 7.0 (#313), Qwen2.5 72B Instruct: 27.0 (#253)

BenchmarkDeepSeek LLM 67BQwen2.5 72B Instruct
GPQA Diamond24.6%49.1%
MMLU-Pro—63.1%
Confabulations—19.1%
GPQA (HELM)—42.6%
LMArena Expert—1245
ARC (AI2) Challenge—94.5%
MMLU—85.3%
TriviaQA—71.9%

Multilingual Qwen2.5 72B Instruct leads

DeepSeek LLM 67B: 29.4 (#267), Qwen2.5 72B Instruct: 41.0 (#213)

BenchmarkDeepSeek LLM 67BQwen2.5 72B Instruct
LMArena Non-English10731252
LMArena Chinese11321272
LMArena French—1280
LMArena German—1234
LMArena Japanese—1180
LMArena Korean—1188
LMArena Russian—1264
LMArena Spanish—1256

Instruction Following Qwen2.5 72B Instruct leads

DeepSeek LLM 67B: 55.4 (#277), Qwen2.5 72B Instruct: 65.5 (#221)

BenchmarkDeepSeek LLM 67BQwen2.5 72B Instruct
LMArena Instruction Following10791254
IFEval—80.6%

Long Context Qwen2.5 72B Instruct leads

DeepSeek LLM 67B: 33.1 (#265), Qwen2.5 72B Instruct: 38.9 (#188)

BenchmarkDeepSeek LLM 67BQwen2.5 72B Instruct
LMArena Longer Query10921282

Writing & Preference Qwen2.5 72B Instruct leads

DeepSeek LLM 67B: 31.6 (#282), Qwen2.5 72B Instruct: 46.7 (#215)

BenchmarkDeepSeek LLM 67BQwen2.5 72B Instruct
LMArena Text11051269
LMArena Creative Writing10671221
LMArena Multi-Turn10821272
WildBench—80.2%

Frequently asked questions

Is DeepSeek LLM 67B better than Qwen2.5 72B Instruct?

Qwen2.5 72B Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 31.9 to 24.9 on the Noometry Index.

Is DeepSeek LLM 67B or Qwen2.5 72B Instruct better for coding?

Qwen2.5 72B Instruct scores higher on coding benchmarks: 33.2 versus 31.9 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do DeepSeek LLM 67B and Qwen2.5 72B Instruct share?

14 benchmarks have published results for both models. DeepSeek LLM 67B has 15 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5 72B Instruct has 43.

Related comparisons

Go deeper