Model Comparison
Gemini 3.1 Pro vs Qwen2.5 72B InstructWhich is better in 2026?
Gemini 3.1 Pro significantly outperforms across most benchmarks. Qwen2.5 72B Instruct is 15.5x cheaper per token.
Verdict: Gemini 3.1 Pro vs Qwen2.5 72B Instruct — which is better?
Gemini 3.1 Pro (by Google) and Qwen2.5 72B Instruct (by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team) are two of the AI models people compare most. Here is how they stack up on benchmarks, price and capabilities, and which one to pick in 2026.
Gemini 3.1 Pro outperforms in 1 benchmarks (GPQA), while Qwen2.5 72B Instruct is better at 0 benchmarks. Gemini 3.1 Pro significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.
On price, Qwen2.5 72B Instruct is roughly 15.5x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.
Gemini 3.1 Pro also accepts a larger context window (1,048,576 input tokens), making it the stronger choice for long documents and large codebases.
Choose Gemini 3.1 Pro if…
- you want the strongest raw capability — it leads on 1 of 1 shared benchmarks
- you process long inputs — it offers a 1,048,576 token context window
- you want the most recent training data — it shipped Feb 2026
Choose Qwen2.5 72B Instruct if…
- cost matters — it's about 15.5x cheaper per token
- you need open weights you can self-host or fine-tune
Performance Benchmarks
Comparative analysis across standard metrics
Gemini 3.1 Pro outperforms in 1 benchmarks (GPQA), while Qwen2.5 72B Instruct is better at 0 benchmarks.
Gemini 3.1 Pro significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.
Arena Performance
Human preference votes
Pricing Analysis
Price comparison per million tokens
For input processing, Gemini 3.1 Pro ($2.50/1M tokens) is 7.1x more expensive than Qwen2.5 72B Instruct ($0.35/1M tokens).
For output processing, Gemini 3.1 Pro ($15.00/1M tokens) is 37.5x more expensive than Qwen2.5 72B Instruct ($0.40/1M tokens).
In conclusion, Gemini 3.1 Pro is more expensive than Qwen2.5 72B Instruct.*
* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens
Context Window
Maximum input and output token capacity
Gemini 3.1 Pro accepts 1,048,576 input tokens compared to Qwen2.5 72B Instruct's 131,072 tokens. Gemini 3.1 Pro can generate longer responses up to 65,536 tokens, while Qwen2.5 72B Instruct is limited to 8,192 tokens.
Input Capabilities
Supported data types and modalities
Gemini 3.1 Pro supports multimodal inputs, whereas Qwen2.5 72B Instruct does not.
Gemini 3.1 Pro can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.
Gemini 3.1 Pro
Qwen2.5 72B Instruct
License
Usage and distribution terms
Gemini 3.1 Pro is licensed under a proprietary license, while Qwen2.5 72B Instruct uses Qwen.
License differences may affect how you can use these models in commercial or open-source projects.
Proprietary
Closed source
Qwen
Open weights
Release Timeline
When each model was launched
Gemini 3.1 Pro was released on 2026-02-19, while Qwen2.5 72B Instruct was released on 2024-09-19.
Gemini 3.1 Pro is 17 months newer than Qwen2.5 72B Instruct.
Feb 19, 2026
3 months ago
1.4yr newerSep 19, 2024
1.7 years ago
Knowledge Cutoff
When training data ends
Gemini 3.1 Pro has a documented knowledge cutoff of 2025-01-31, while Qwen2.5 72B Instruct's cutoff date is not specified.
We can confirm Gemini 3.1 Pro's training data extends to 2025-01-31, but cannot make a direct comparison without Qwen2.5 72B Instruct's cutoff date.
Jan 2025
—
Provider Availability
Gemini 3.1 Pro is available from Google. Qwen2.5 72B Instruct is available from DeepInfra, Hyperbolic, Fireworks, Together.
Gemini 3.1 Pro
Qwen2.5 72B Instruct
Outputs Comparison
Key Takeaways
Qwen2.5 72B Instruct
View detailsAlibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Detailed Comparison
| Feature | | |
|---|
FAQ
Common questions about Gemini 3.1 Pro vs Qwen2.5 72B Instruct.