Model Comparison

Qwen2-VL-72B-Instruct vs Qwen3-Coder

Comparing Qwen2-VL-72B-Instruct and Qwen3-Coder across benchmarks, pricing, and capabilities.

Performance Benchmarks

Comparative analysis across standard metrics

No common benchmarks found

Qwen2-VL-72B-Instruct and Qwen3-Coder don't have any common benchmark datasets to compare. They may have been evaluated on different testing suites.

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
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen2-VL-72B-Instruct
Input tokens$0.00
Output tokens$0.00
Best providerUnknown Organization
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen3-Coder
Input tokens$0.18
Output tokens$0.18
Best providerDeepinfra
Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue

Model Size

Parameter count comparison

406.6B diff

Qwen3-Coder has 406.6B more parameters than Qwen2-VL-72B-Instruct, making it 554.0% larger.

Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen2-VL-72B-Instruct
73.4Bparameters
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen3-Coder
480.0Bparameters
73.4B
Qwen2-VL-72B-Instruct
480.0B
Qwen3-Coder

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Only Qwen3-Coder specifies input context (256,000 tokens). Only Qwen3-Coder specifies output context (256,000 tokens).

Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen2-VL-72B-Instruct
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen3-Coder
Input256,000 tokens
Output256,000 tokens
Tue Apr 14 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input Capabilities

Supported data types and modalities

Qwen2-VL-72B-Instruct supports multimodal inputs, whereas Qwen3-Coder does not.

Qwen2-VL-72B-Instruct can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.

Qwen2-VL-72B-Instruct

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Qwen3-Coder

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Qwen2-VL-72B-Instruct is licensed under tongyi-qianwen, while Qwen3-Coder uses Apache 2.0.

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

Qwen2-VL-72B-Instruct

tongyi-qianwen

Open weights

Qwen3-Coder

Apache 2.0

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Qwen2-VL-72B-Instruct was released on 2024-08-29, while Qwen3-Coder was released on 2025-01-01.

Qwen3-Coder is 4 months newer than Qwen2-VL-72B-Instruct.

Qwen2-VL-72B-Instruct

Aug 29, 2024

1.6 years ago

Qwen3-Coder

Jan 1, 2025

1.3 years ago

4mo newer

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Qwen2-VL-72B-Instruct has a documented knowledge cutoff of 2023-06-30, while Qwen3-Coder's cutoff date is not specified.

We can confirm Qwen2-VL-72B-Instruct's training data extends to 2023-06-30, but cannot make a direct comparison without Qwen3-Coder's cutoff date.

Qwen2-VL-72B-Instruct

Jun 2023

Qwen3-Coder

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion

Key Takeaways

Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team

Qwen2-VL-72B-Instruct

View details

Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team

Supports multimodal inputs
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team

Qwen3-Coder

View details

Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team

Larger context window (256,000 tokens)

Detailed Comparison

AI Model Comparison Table
Feature
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen2-VL-72B-Instruct
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen3-Coder

FAQ

Common questions about Qwen2-VL-72B-Instruct vs Qwen3-Coder

Qwen2-VL-72B-Instruct (Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team) and Qwen3-Coder (Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team) each have strengths in different areas. Compare their benchmark scores, pricing, context windows, and capabilities above to determine which fits your needs.
Qwen2-VL-72B-Instruct scores DocVQAtest: 96.5%, VCR_en_easy: 91.9%, ChartQA: 88.3%, OCRBench: 87.7%, MMBench_test: 86.5%.
Qwen2-VL-72B-Instruct supports an unknown number of tokens and Qwen3-Coder supports 256K tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.
Key differences include multimodal support (yes vs no), licensing (tongyi-qianwen vs Apache 2.0). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.