LLM Reference

Mistral Large 2 vs Qwen2.5-72B

Mistral Large 2 (2025) and Qwen2.5-72B (2025) are compact production models from MistralAI and Alibaba. Mistral Large 2 ships a 128k-token context window, while Qwen2.5-72B ships a 128k-token context window. On MMLU PRO, Qwen2.5-72B leads by 2.3 pts. This comparison covers specs, pricing, API access, capabilities, benchmarks, input and output token costs, and production fit for coding and agent workloads.

Mistral Large 2 is safer overall; choose Qwen2.5-72B when provider fit matters.

Decision scorecard

Local evidence first
SignalMistral Large 2Qwen2.5-72B
Best formultimodal apps, tool-calling agents, and provider-routed productiontool-calling agents
Decision fitCoding, RAG, and AgentsRAG, Agents, and Long context
Context window128k128k
Cheapest output$2.40/1M tokens-
Provider routes4 tracked0 tracked
Shared benchmarks1 rowsMMLU PRO leader

Decision tradeoffs

Choose Mistral Large 2 when...
  • Mistral Large 2 has broader tracked provider coverage for fallback and procurement flexibility.
  • Mistral Large 2 uniquely exposes Vision, Multimodal, and Structured outputs in local model data.
  • Local decision data tags Mistral Large 2 for Coding, RAG, and Agents.
Choose Qwen2.5-72B when...
  • Qwen2.5-72B holds a shared-benchmark lead on MMLU PRO, ahead by 2.3 points.
  • Local decision data tags Qwen2.5-72B for RAG, Agents, and Long context.

Monthly cost at traffic

Estimate token spend from the cheapest tracked input and output route or tier on this page.

Mistral Large 2

$984

Cheapest tracked route/tier: AWS Bedrock

Qwen2.5-72B

Unavailable

No complete token price in local provider data

Cost delta unavailable until both models have sourced input and output token prices.

Switch friction

Mistral Large 2 -> Qwen2.5-72B
  • No overlapping tracked provider route is sourced for Mistral Large 2 and Qwen2.5-72B; plan for SDK, billing, or endpoint changes.
  • Check replacement coverage for Vision, Multimodal, and Structured outputs before moving production traffic.
Qwen2.5-72B -> Mistral Large 2
  • No overlapping tracked provider route is sourced for Qwen2.5-72B and Mistral Large 2; plan for SDK, billing, or endpoint changes.
  • Mistral Large 2 adds Vision, Multimodal, and Structured outputs in local capability data.

Specs

Specification
Released2025-11-252025-10-10
Context window128k128k
Parameters123B72B
Architecturedecoder only-
LicenseMistral LicenseApache 2.0(OSI)
OpennessOpen weightsOpen source
Commercial useNon-commercial onlyCommercial use allowed
Knowledge cutoff2025-072024-09

Pricing and availability

Pricing attributeMistral Large 2Qwen2.5-72B
Input price$0.48/1M tokens-
Output price$2.40/1M tokens-
Providers-

Capabilities

CapabilityMistral Large 2Qwen2.5-72B
VisionYesNo
MultimodalYesNo
ReasoningNoNo
Function callingYesYes
Tool useYesYes
Structured outputsYesNo
Code executionNoNo
IDE integrationNoNo
Computer useNoNo
Parallel agentsNoNo

Benchmarks

BenchmarkMistral Large 2Qwen2.5-72B
MMLU PRO69.772.0

Deep dive

On shared benchmark coverage, MMLU PRO has Mistral Large 2 at 69.7 and Qwen2.5-72B at 72, with Qwen2.5-72B ahead by 2.3 points. The largest visible gap is 2.3 points on MMLU PRO, which matters most when that benchmark mirrors your workload. Treat isolated benchmark wins as directional, because provider routing, prompt style, and tool access can move real application results.

The capability footprint differs most on vision: Mistral Large 2, multimodal input: Mistral Large 2, and structured outputs: Mistral Large 2. Both models share function calling and tool use, so the practical split is not just feature count. Use those differences to decide whether the page is about raw model quality, agentic coding support, multimodal ingestion, or predictable structured API behavior.

Pricing coverage is uneven: Mistral Large 2 has $0.48/1M input tokens and Qwen2.5-72B has no token price sourced yet. Provider availability is 4 tracked routes versus 0. Treat unknown pricing as an integration gap, then verify the route you will actually call before estimating production spend.

Choose Mistral Large 2 when vision-heavy evaluation and broader provider choice are central to the workload. Choose Qwen2.5-72B when provider fit are more important. For production, rerun your own prompts through the exact provider, region, and tool stack you plan to ship.

FAQ

Which has a larger context window, Mistral Large 2 or Qwen2.5-72B?

Mistral Large 2 supports 128k tokens, while Qwen2.5-72B supports 128k tokens. That gap matters most for long documents, large codebases, retrieval-heavy agents, and conversations where earlier context must remain visible.

Is Mistral Large 2 or Qwen2.5-72B open source?

Mistral Large 2 is listed under Mistral License. Qwen2.5-72B is listed under Apache 2.0. License labels affect whether you can self-host, redistribute weights, or rely only on hosted APIs, so confirm the upstream license before deployment.

Which is better for vision, Mistral Large 2 or Qwen2.5-72B?

Mistral Large 2 has the clearer documented vision signal in this comparison. If vision is mission-critical, validate it against the provider endpoint because model-level support and API-level exposure can differ.

Which is better for multimodal input, Mistral Large 2 or Qwen2.5-72B?

Mistral Large 2 has the clearer documented multimodal input signal in this comparison. If multimodal input is mission-critical, validate it against the provider endpoint because model-level support and API-level exposure can differ.

Which is better for function calling, Mistral Large 2 or Qwen2.5-72B?

Both Mistral Large 2 and Qwen2.5-72B expose function calling. The better choice depends on benchmark fit, context budget, pricing, and whether your provider route exposes the same capability surface. Use this as a quick comparison signal, then confirm the provider-specific limits before committing to production.

Where can I run Mistral Large 2 and Qwen2.5-72B?

Mistral Large 2 is available on OpenRouter, IBM watsonx, AWS Bedrock, and Mistral AI Studio. Qwen2.5-72B is available on the tracked providers still being sourced. Provider coverage can affect latency, region availability, compliance posture, and fallback options.

Continue comparing

Last reviewed: 2026-05-11. Data sourced from public model cards and provider documentation.