Qwen2.5 VL 72B is the stronger all-rounder.
Scores updated · 12 tests both models report · How we compare
Where each one wins
Tests won in each of the one area where both have results. Each piece is one test, so a longer bar means more evidence; grey means the two scored within a point of each other.
The biggest differences
The tests each model wins by the widest margin, up to three each. Scores are out of 100.
Every test, side by side
All 12 tests both models report. The winning score is in its model's colour; marks a score checked independently.
Images and chartsQwen2.5 VL 72B
Other results10 tests, not counted
Tests outside the eight areas. They are not counted above: several are summary scores built from other tests, or the same test under another name.
- VideoMME (w sub.)Qwen2.5 VL 72B by 13.16679.1+13.1
- MMBench-EN-v1.1 (Acc)Qwen2.5 VL 72B by 12.37688.3+12.3
- RealWorldQA (Acc)Qwen2.5 VL 72B by 11.76475.7+11.7
- ScreenSpot-Pro (Acc)Kimi VL A3B Thinking by 9.252.843.6+9.2
- MMStar (Acc)Qwen2.5 VL 72B by 6.664.270.8+6.6
- MMLongBench-DOC (Acc)Qwen2.5 VL 72B by 6.332.538.8+6.3
- MMVet (Acc)Qwen2.5 VL 72B by 4.569.574+4.5
- OCRBench (Acc)Qwen2.5 VL 72B by 21 rating points864885+21 rating
- MATH-VisionQwen2.5 VL 72B by 1.336.838.1+1.3
- MathVision (full) (Pass@1)Qwen2.5 VL 72B by 1.336.838.1+1.3
Questions people ask
Which is better, Kimi VL A3B Thinking or Qwen2.5 VL 72B?
Qwen2.5 VL 72B wins the one area where both have results: images and charts. Kimi VL A3B Thinking wins none.
How do you compare the two?
We use the 12 benchmark tests both models have published scores on. The verdict counts the 2 tests in the eight capability areas, and a gap under one point (ten on rating-style scales) counts as a tie. The other 10 are listed but not counted, because several are summary scores or repeat a test. Each score is the one shown on the model's own page.