Alibaba Qwen 2.5 72B vs Mistral Mixtral 8x7B

Detailed comparison for LLMs

AlibabaMistral

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 Mixtral 8x7B scores 38.0% 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 Mistral Mixtral 8x7B. Green marks the safer model on each metric.

Overall (ASR)

Qwen 2.5 72B
26.3%
Mixtral 8x7B
38.0%

TAP Attack Method (ASR)

Qwen 2.5 72B
55.2%
Mixtral 8x7B
66.2%

Crescendo Attack Method (ASR)

Qwen 2.5 72B
23.7%
Mixtral 8x7B
24.3%

Zero-Shot (ASR)

Qwen 2.5 72B
0.3%
Mixtral 8x7B
23.6%

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
Mixtral 8x7B
Full security profile
Alibaba Qwen 2.5 72B
Full security profile
Mistral Mixtral 8x7B

Frequently asked questions

Is Alibaba Qwen 2.5 72B or Mistral Mixtral 8x7B 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 Mixtral 8x7B scores 38.0% on attack success rate (ASR) (lower is better).

What is the attack success rate (ASR) of Qwen 2.5 72B vs Mixtral 8x7B?

Qwen 2.5 72B has a 26.3% ASR and Mixtral 8x7B has a 38.0% 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 Mixtral 8x7B 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