Noometry

Model comparison

GPT-4.1 mini vs Qwen2-72B

GPT-4.1 mini is the stronger model overall, scoring 33.6 to 30.0 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 22 shared benchmarks.

GPT-4.1 mini OpenAI

33.6

Rank #240 Confirmed

Qwen2-72B Alibaba (Qwen)

30.0

Rank #300 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 22 benchmarks with published results for both. GPT-4.1 mini scores higher in 6 categories and Qwen2-72B in 3 categories; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in agentic & tool use, where GPT-4.1 mini leads 33.3 to 17.0.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is MATH Level 5: 87.3% for GPT-4.1 mini and 39.1% for Qwen2-72B.
  • Qwen2-72B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

GPT-4.1 miniQwen2-72B
ProviderOpenAIAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index33.630.0
Released2025-04-142024-06-07
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1.05M—
Max output33K—
Input $ / M tokens$0.40—
Output $ / M tokens$1.60—
Results tracked4726

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

Category by category

Coding GPT-4.1 mini leads

GPT-4.1 mini: 30.6 (#293), Qwen2-72B: 29.1 (#310)

BenchmarkGPT-4.1 miniQwen2-72B
WeirdML37.6%11.3%
BigCodeBench Instruct48.9%38.5%
LMArena Coding13671196
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)23.9%—
Aider Polyglot32.4%—
SciCode40.4%—
BigCodeBench Complete—54%
CadEval16%—

Agentic & Tool Use GPT-4.1 mini leads

GPT-4.1 mini: 33.3 (#55), Qwen2-72B: 17.0 (#146)

BenchmarkGPT-4.1 miniQwen2-72B
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard50.5%—
TheAgentCompany—1.1%
METR Time Horizons—29.9%

Reasoning Qwen2-72B leads

GPT-4.1 mini: 10.8 (#340), Qwen2-72B: 23.2 (#181)

BenchmarkGPT-4.1 miniQwen2-72B
LMArena Hard Prompts13491191
Epoch Capabilities Index135.01125.28
ARC-AGI-20%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark48.6%—
ARC-AGI-13.5%—
CritPt0%—
Chess Puzzles7%—
Mystery Game Puzzles7%—
DTBench68.8%—
LMCA21.1%—

Math Qwen2-72B leads

GPT-4.1 mini: 24.1 (#270), Qwen2-72B: 30.2 (#236)

BenchmarkGPT-4.1 miniQwen2-72B
LMArena Math13431235
MATH Level 587.3%39.1%
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)6.7%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202544.7%—
Omni-MATH49.1%—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)4.5%—

Knowledge GPT-4.1 mini leads

GPT-4.1 mini: 34.7 (#194), Qwen2-72B: 21.2 (#275)

BenchmarkGPT-4.1 miniQwen2-72B
GPQA Diamond65.8%40.8%
LMArena Expert13381171
SimpleQA Verified12.7%—
MMLU-Pro78.3%—
GPQA (HELM)61.4%—
MMLU—82.4%

Multimodal Not comparable

GPT-4.1 mini: 35.8 (#82), Qwen2-72B: —

BenchmarkGPT-4.1 miniQwen2-72B
LMArena Vision1181—

Multilingual GPT-4.1 mini leads

GPT-4.1 mini: 45.7 (#166), Qwen2-72B: 35.9 (#244)

BenchmarkGPT-4.1 miniQwen2-72B
LMArena Non-English13181176
LMArena Chinese13291240
LMArena French13581170
LMArena German13511151
LMArena Japanese12901111
LMArena Korean12981083
LMArena Russian13241169
LMArena Spanish13191169

Instruction Following GPT-4.1 mini leads

GPT-4.1 mini: 73.7 (#118), Qwen2-72B: 61.7 (#241)

BenchmarkGPT-4.1 miniQwen2-72B
LMArena Instruction Following13331181
IFEval90.4%—

Long Context Qwen2-72B leads

GPT-4.1 mini: 31.8 (#275), Qwen2-72B: 36.1 (#235)

BenchmarkGPT-4.1 miniQwen2-72B
LMArena Longer Query13441192
Fiction.LiveBench44.4%—

Writing & Preference GPT-4.1 mini leads

GPT-4.1 mini: 48.6 (#199), Qwen2-72B: 40.8 (#241)

BenchmarkGPT-4.1 miniQwen2-72B
LMArena Text13401203
LMArena Creative Writing13001181
LMArena Multi-Turn13541196
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1147—
WildBench83.8%—

Frequently asked questions

Is GPT-4.1 mini better than Qwen2-72B?

GPT-4.1 mini is the stronger model overall, scoring 33.6 to 30.0 on the Noometry Index.

Is GPT-4.1 mini or Qwen2-72B better for coding?

GPT-4.1 mini scores higher on coding benchmarks: 30.6 versus 29.1 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do GPT-4.1 mini and Qwen2-72B share?

22 benchmarks have published results for both models. GPT-4.1 mini has 47 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2-72B has 26.

Related comparisons

Go deeper