Alibaba Qwen 2.5 72B vs Google Gemini 2.0 Flash

Detailed comparison for LLMs

AlibabaGoogle

On Guardion's LLM vulnerability Benchmark, Alibaba Qwen 2.5 72B is the more secure of the two: Qwen 2.5 72B scores 26.3% and Gemini 2.0 Flash scores 33.6% on attack success rate (ASR) (lower is better).

Head-to-Head Overview

Qwen 2.5 72B is the overall winner in this comparison!

Attack Success Rate (lower is safer)

ASR for Alibaba Qwen 2.5 72B vs Google Gemini 2.0 Flash. Green marks the safer model on each metric.

Overall (ASR)

Qwen 2.5 72B
26.3%
Gemini 2.0 Flash
33.6%

TAP Attack Method (ASR)

Qwen 2.5 72B
55.2%
Gemini 2.0 Flash
67.6%

Crescendo Attack Method (ASR)

Qwen 2.5 72B
23.7%
Gemini 2.0 Flash
30.4%

Zero-Shot (ASR)

Qwen 2.5 72B
0.3%
Gemini 2.0 Flash
2.8%

Key Highlights

  • Alibaba Qwen 2.5 72B has a lower Overall (ASR).
  • Alibaba Qwen 2.5 72B has a lower TAP Attack Method (ASR).
  • Alibaba Qwen 2.5 72B has a lower Crescendo Attack Method (ASR).
  • Alibaba Qwen 2.5 72B has a lower Zero-Shot (ASR).

Security Profile

Outward is better on every axis.

OverallTAPCrescendoZero-Shot
Qwen 2.5 72B
Gemini 2.0 Flash
Full security profile
Alibaba Qwen 2.5 72B
Full security profile
Google Gemini 2.0 Flash

Frequently asked questions

Is Alibaba Qwen 2.5 72B or Google Gemini 2.0 Flash more secure?

On Guardion's LLM vulnerability Benchmark, Alibaba Qwen 2.5 72B is the more secure of the two: Qwen 2.5 72B scores 26.3% and Gemini 2.0 Flash scores 33.6% on attack success rate (ASR) (lower is better).

What is the attack success rate (ASR) of Qwen 2.5 72B vs Gemini 2.0 Flash?

Qwen 2.5 72B has a 26.3% ASR and Gemini 2.0 Flash has a 33.6% ASR — the share of adversarial prompts that succeed across zero-shot, TAP, and Crescendo attacks. Lower is safer.

How were Qwen 2.5 72B and Gemini 2.0 Flash tested?

Both were red-teamed with the HarmBench framework across zero-shot, TAP (Tree of Attacks with Pruning), and Crescendo multi-turn attacks, scored by Attack Success Rate.

Related Comparisons