Model comparison

GPT-5.2 Pro vs Qwen2-72B

GPT-5.2 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 52.3 to 30.0 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 1 shared benchmarks.

GPT-5.2 Pro OpenAI

52.3

Rank #39 Reported

Qwen2-72B Alibaba (Qwen)

30.0

Rank #300 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 1 benchmark with published results for both. GPT-5.2 Pro scores higher in 2 categories and Qwen2-72B in 0 categories; 2 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where GPT-5.2 Pro leads 65.3 to 30.2.
  • Qwen2-72B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

GPT-5.2 Pro and Qwen2-72B specifications
GPT-5.2 ProQwen2-72B
ProviderOpenAIAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index52.330.0
Released2025-12-112024-06-07
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window400K—
Max output128K—
Input $ / M tokens$21—
Output $ / M tokens$168—
Results tracked826

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

Category by category

Coding Not comparable

GPT-5.2 Pro: —, Qwen2-72B: 29.1 (#310)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.2 ProQwen2-72B
WeirdML—11.3%
BigCodeBench Instruct—38.5%
LMArena Coding—1196
BigCodeBench Complete—54%

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

GPT-5.2 Pro: —, Qwen2-72B: 17.0 (#146)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.2 ProQwen2-72B
TheAgentCompany—1.1%
METR Time Horizons—29.9%

Reasoning GPT-5.2 Pro leads

GPT-5.2 Pro: 51.5 (#33), Qwen2-72B: 23.2 (#181)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.2 ProQwen2-72B
Epoch Capabilities Index155.4125.28
ARC-AGI-254.2%—
SimpleBench57.4%—
NYT Connections (extended)79.3%—
ARC-AGI-190.5%—
LMArena Hard Prompts—1191

Math GPT-5.2 Pro leads

GPT-5.2 Pro: 65.3 (#29), Qwen2-72B: 30.2 (#236)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.2 ProQwen2-72B
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)74%—
FrontierMath Tier 446%—
LMArena Math—1235
MATH Level 5—39.1%
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)31.3%—

Knowledge Not comparable

GPT-5.2 Pro: —, Qwen2-72B: 21.2 (#275)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.2 ProQwen2-72B
GPQA Diamond—40.8%
LMArena Expert—1171
MMLU—82.4%

Multilingual Not comparable

GPT-5.2 Pro: —, Qwen2-72B: 35.9 (#244)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.2 ProQwen2-72B
LMArena Non-English—1176
LMArena Chinese—1240
LMArena French—1170
LMArena German—1151
LMArena Japanese—1111
LMArena Korean—1083
LMArena Russian—1169
LMArena Spanish—1169

Instruction Following Not comparable

GPT-5.2 Pro: —, Qwen2-72B: 61.7 (#241)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.2 ProQwen2-72B
LMArena Instruction Following—1181

Long Context Not comparable

GPT-5.2 Pro: —, Qwen2-72B: 36.1 (#235)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.2 ProQwen2-72B
LMArena Longer Query—1192

Writing & Preference Not comparable

GPT-5.2 Pro: —, Qwen2-72B: 40.8 (#241)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.2 ProQwen2-72B
LMArena Text—1203
LMArena Creative Writing—1181
LMArena Multi-Turn—1196

Frequently asked questions

Is GPT-5.2 Pro better than Qwen2-72B?

GPT-5.2 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 52.3 to 30.0 on the Noometry Index.

How many benchmarks do GPT-5.2 Pro and Qwen2-72B share?

1 benchmark has published results for both models. GPT-5.2 Pro has 8 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2-72B has 26.

Related comparisons

Go deeper