| Signal | Nova Pro 1.0 | Delta | Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct |
|---|---|---|---|
Capabilities | 50 | -- | |
Pricing | 3 | +2 | |
Context window size | 87 | +15 | |
Recency | 48 | -10 | |
Output Capacity | 62 | -13 | |
| Overall Result | 2 wins | of 5 | 2 wins |
5
days ranked higher
3
days
22
days ranked higher
Amazon
Alibaba
Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct saves you $120.00/month
That's $1440.00/year compared to Nova Pro 1.0 at your current usage level of 100K calls/month.
| Metric | Nova Pro 1.0 | Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall Score | 59 | 60 | Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct |
| Rank | #214 | #205 | Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct |
| Quality Rank | #214 | #205 | Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct |
| Adoption Rank | #214 | #205 | Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct |
| Parameters | -- | 72B | -- |
| Context Window | 300K | 33K | Nova Pro 1.0 |
| Pricing | $0.80/$3.20/M | $0.80/$0.80/M | -- |
| Signal Scores | |||
| Capabilities | 50 | 50 | Nova Pro 1.0 |
| Pricing | 3 | 1 | Nova Pro 1.0 |
| Context window size | 87 | 72 | Nova Pro 1.0 |
| Recency | 48 | 59 | Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct |
| Output Capacity | 62 | 75 | Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct |
Our composite score (0–100) combines six weighted signals: benchmark performance (25%), pricing efficiency (25%), context window size (15%), model recency (15%), output capacity (10%), and capability versatility (10%). Here's what the scores mean for these two models:
Scores 59/100 (rank #214), placing it in the top 27% of all 290 models tracked.
Scores 60/100 (rank #205), placing it in the top 30% of all 290 models tracked.
With only a 1-point gap, these models are in the same performance tier. The practical difference in output quality is minimal — your choice should depend on pricing, latency requirements, and specific feature needs.
Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct offers 60% better value per quality point. At 1M tokens/day, you'd spend $24.00/month with Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct vs $60.00/month with Nova Pro 1.0 — a $36.00 monthly difference.
Both models have comparable response speeds. For most applications, the latency difference is negligible.
When latency matters most: Interactive chatbots, IDE code completion, real-time translation, and user-facing applications where response time directly impacts experience. For batch processing, background summarization, or offline analysis, latency is less critical.
Code generation & review
Higher benchmark score (0/100) indicates stronger performance on coding tasks like generating functions, debugging, and refactoring
Customer support chatbot
Faster response time (speed score 0/100) is critical for user-facing chat. Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct also offers lower per-token costs for high-volume support
Long document analysis
Larger context window (300K tokens) can process longer documents, contracts, and research papers in a single pass
Batch data extraction
Lower output pricing ($0.80/M) reduces costs when processing thousands of records daily
Creative writing & content
Higher overall composite score (60/100) correlates with better nuance, coherence, and style in long-form content
Image understanding & OCR
Supports vision input — can analyze screenshots, diagrams, photos, and scanned documents directly
Nova Pro 1.0 and Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct are extremely close in overall performance (only 1 points apart). Your best choice depends entirely on which specific strengths matter most for your use case.
Best for Quality
Nova Pro 1.0
Marginally better benchmark scores; both are excellent
Best for Cost
Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct
60% lower pricing; better value at scale
Best for Reliability
Nova Pro 1.0
Higher uptime and faster response speeds
Best for Prototyping
Nova Pro 1.0
Stronger community support and better developer experience
Best for Production
Nova Pro 1.0
Wider enterprise adoption and proven at scale
by Amazon
by Alibaba
| Capability | Nova Pro 1.0 | Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Vision (Image Input) | ||
| Function Callingdiffers | ||
| Streaming | ||
| JSON Modediffers | ||
| Reasoning | ||
| Web Search | ||
| Image Output |
Amazon
Alibaba
Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct saves you $2.88/month
That's 55% cheaper than Nova Pro 1.0 at 1,000 tokens/request and 100 requests/day.
Assumes 60% input / 40% output token ratio per request. Actual costs may vary based on your usage pattern.
| Parameter | Nova Pro 1.0 | Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Context Window | 300K | 33K |
| Max Output Tokens | 5,120 | 32,768 |
| Open Source | No | Yes |
| Created | Dec 5, 2024 | Feb 1, 2025 |
Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct scores 60/100 (rank #205) compared to Nova Pro 1.0's 59/100 (rank #214), giving it a 1-point advantage. Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct is the stronger overall choice, though Nova Pro 1.0 may excel in specific areas like certain benchmarks.
Nova Pro 1.0 is ranked #214 and Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct is ranked #205 out of 290+ AI models. Rankings use a composite score combining benchmark performance (25%), pricing (25%), context window (15%), recency (15%), output capacity (10%), and versatility (10%). Scores update hourly.
Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct is cheaper at $0.80/M output tokens vs Nova Pro 1.0's $3.20/M output tokens — 4.0x more expensive. Input token pricing: Nova Pro 1.0 at $0.80/M vs Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct at $0.80/M.
Nova Pro 1.0 has a larger context window of 300,000 tokens compared to Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct's 32,768 tokens. A larger context window means the model can process longer documents and conversations.