Model Comparison

Claude 3.5 Haiku vs Qwen2 72B Instruct

Claude 3.5 Haiku shows notably better performance in the majority of benchmarks.

Want to compare interactively?Try the playground

Performance Benchmarks

Comparative analysis across standard metrics

4 benchmarks

Claude 3.5 Haiku outperforms in 3 benchmarks (HumanEval, MATH, MMLU-Pro), while Qwen2 72B Instruct is better at 1 benchmark (GPQA).

Claude 3.5 Haiku shows notably better performance in the majority of benchmarks.

Tue Apr 14 2026 • llm-stats.com

Arena Performance

Human preference votes

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

Cost data unavailable.

Lowest available price from all providers
Tue Apr 14 2026 • llm-stats.com
Anthropic
Claude 3.5 Haiku
Input tokens$0.80
Output tokens$4.00
Best providerAWS Bedrock
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen2 72B Instruct
Input tokens$0.00
Output tokens$0.00
Best providerUnknown Organization
Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue→

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Only Claude 3.5 Haiku specifies input context (200,000 tokens). Only Claude 3.5 Haiku specifies output context (200,000 tokens).

Anthropic
Claude 3.5 Haiku
Input200,000 tokens
Output200,000 tokens
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen2 72B Instruct
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
Tue Apr 14 2026 • llm-stats.com

License

Usage and distribution terms

Claude 3.5 Haiku is licensed under a proprietary license, while Qwen2 72B Instruct uses tongyi-qianwen.

License differences may affect how you can use these models in commercial or open-source projects.

Claude 3.5 Haiku

Proprietary

Closed source

Qwen2 72B Instruct

tongyi-qianwen

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Claude 3.5 Haiku was released on 2024-10-22, while Qwen2 72B Instruct was released on 2024-07-23.

Claude 3.5 Haiku is 3 months newer than Qwen2 72B Instruct.

Claude 3.5 Haiku

Oct 22, 2024

1.5 years ago

3mo newer
Qwen2 72B Instruct

Jul 23, 2024

1.7 years ago

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Neither model specifies a knowledge cutoff date.

Unable to compare the recency of their training data.

No cutoff dates available

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion→

Key Takeaways

Anthropic
Larger context window (200,000 tokens)
Higher HumanEval score (88.1% vs 86.0%)
Higher MATH score (69.4% vs 59.7%)
Higher MMLU-Pro score (65.0% vs 64.4%)
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team

Qwen2 72B Instruct

View details

Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team

Has open weights
Higher GPQA score (42.4% vs 41.6%)

Detailed Comparison

AI Model Comparison Table
Feature
Anthropic
Claude 3.5 Haiku
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen2 72B Instruct

FAQ

Common questions about Claude 3.5 Haiku vs Qwen2 72B Instruct

Claude 3.5 Haiku shows notably better performance in the majority of benchmarks. Claude 3.5 Haiku is made by Anthropic and Qwen2 72B Instruct is made by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their benchmark scores, pricing, and capabilities above.
Claude 3.5 Haiku scores HumanEval: 88.1%, MGSM: 85.6%, DROP: 83.1%, MATH: 69.4%, MMLU-Pro: 65.0%. Qwen2 72B Instruct scores GSM8k: 91.1%, CMMLU: 90.1%, HellaSwag: 87.6%, HumanEval: 86.0%, Winogrande: 85.1%.
Claude 3.5 Haiku supports 200K tokens and Qwen2 72B Instruct supports an unknown number of tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.
Key differences include licensing (Proprietary vs tongyi-qianwen). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.
Claude 3.5 Haiku is developed by Anthropic and Qwen2 72B Instruct is developed by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team.