Model comparison

Mixtral 8x22B vs Qwen1.5-72B

Qwen1.5-72B is the stronger model overall, scoring 30.8 to 27.1 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 22 shared benchmarks.

Mixtral 8x22B Mistral AI

27.1

Rank #333 Confirmed

Qwen1.5-72B Alibaba (Qwen)

30.8

Rank #285 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 22 benchmarks with published results for both. Mixtral 8x22B scores higher in 1 category and Qwen1.5-72B in 7 categories; 5 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where Qwen1.5-72B leads 33.2 to 22.9.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is BigCodeBench Complete: 50.2% for Mixtral 8x22B and 40.3% for Qwen1.5-72B.

Side by side

Mixtral 8x22B and Qwen1.5-72B specifications
Mixtral 8x22BQwen1.5-72B
ProviderMistral AIAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index27.130.8
Released2024-04-172024-02-04
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window64K—
Max output64K—
Input $ / M tokens$2—
Output $ / M tokens$6—
Results tracked3422

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

Category by category

Coding Qwen1.5-72B leads

Mixtral 8x22B: 24.2 (#329), Qwen1.5-72B: 31.9 (#277)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkMixtral 8x22BQwen1.5-72B
BigCodeBench Instruct40.6%33.2%
LMArena Coding11661165
BigCodeBench Complete50.2%40.3%
HumanEval+72%59.1%
MBPP+64.3%61.6%
WeirdML3.2%—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Mixtral 8x22B: 23.1 (#127), Qwen1.5-72B: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkMixtral 8x22BQwen1.5-72B
Cybench7.5%—

Reasoning Qwen1.5-72B leads

Mixtral 8x22B: 19.9 (#248), Qwen1.5-72B: 22.2 (#203)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkMixtral 8x22BQwen1.5-72B
LMArena Hard Prompts11501148
DTBench55.1%—
Epoch Capabilities Index122.03—
ForecastBench56.3—

Math Qwen1.5-72B leads

Mixtral 8x22B: 22.9 (#275), Qwen1.5-72B: 33.2 (#205)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkMixtral 8x22BQwen1.5-72B
LMArena Math11841164
Omni-MATH16.3%—
MATH Level 524.2%—

Knowledge Mixtral 8x22B leads

Mixtral 8x22B: 15.1 (#293), Qwen1.5-72B: 11.5 (#300)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkMixtral 8x22BQwen1.5-72B
GPQA Diamond34.1%28.8%
LMArena Expert11131136
MMLU-Pro46%—
GPQA (HELM)33.4%—
MMLU77.8%—

Multilingual Too close to call

Mixtral 8x22B: 32.8 (#255), Qwen1.5-72B: 33.2 (#253)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkMixtral 8x22BQwen1.5-72B
LMArena Non-English11281135
LMArena Chinese11161186
LMArena French11661159
LMArena German11411084
LMArena Japanese10371061
LMArena Korean10571050
LMArena Russian11581104
LMArena Spanish11511110

Instruction Following Qwen1.5-72B leads

Mixtral 8x22B: 57.7 (#266), Qwen1.5-72B: 59.3 (#256)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkMixtral 8x22BQwen1.5-72B
LMArena Instruction Following11471141
IFEval72.4%—

Long Context Too close to call

Mixtral 8x22B: 34.7 (#247), Qwen1.5-72B: 35.1 (#243)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkMixtral 8x22BQwen1.5-72B
LMArena Longer Query11441157

Writing & Preference Too close to call

Mixtral 8x22B: 36.9 (#262), Qwen1.5-72B: 37.3 (#258)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkMixtral 8x22BQwen1.5-72B
LMArena Text11621166
LMArena Creative Writing11411137
LMArena Multi-Turn11301160
WildBench71.1%—

Frequently asked questions

Is Mixtral 8x22B better than Qwen1.5-72B?

Qwen1.5-72B is the stronger model overall, scoring 30.8 to 27.1 on the Noometry Index.

Is Mixtral 8x22B or Qwen1.5-72B better for coding?

Qwen1.5-72B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 31.9 versus 24.2 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Mixtral 8x22B and Qwen1.5-72B share?

22 benchmarks have published results for both models. Mixtral 8x22B has 34 scored results on Noometry and Qwen1.5-72B has 22.

Related comparisons

Go deeper