Large 72B vision-language model from Qwen 2.5 generation.
Second-generation Qwen coding model at 32B scale.
No shared demos for these models yet.
No captured outputs for these models yet.
Based on the Capability Index, Qwen2.5 VL 72B scores higher (62.8 vs 53.8). However, "better" depends on your use case — pricing, speed, context window, and specific capability needs all matter.
Qwen2.5 Coder 32B has a lower blended cost. Qwen2.5 VL 72B: $0.80 input / $1.00 output. Qwen2.5 Coder 32B: $0.66 input / $1.00 output.
Qwen2.5 VL 72B has a larger context window: Qwen2.5 VL 72B supports 128K tokens vs Qwen2.5 Coder 32B at 33K tokens.
Qwen2.5 VL 72B supports vision/image input, but Qwen2.5 Coder 32B does not.
Key differences: Qwen2.5 VL 72B has a notably higher capability index (9.0 point gap); only Qwen2.5 VL 72B supports vision input. Compare full specs on this page.
If cost is your priority, choose the cheaper option. If you need the highest intelligence for complex tasks, pick the higher-scoring model. For long documents or codebases, choose the larger context window. You can try both Qwen2.5 VL 72B and Qwen2.5 Coder 32B for free on idapt.app to see which performs better for your specific needs.