OpenAI GPT-4o Mini vs Alibaba Qwen 2.5 72B

Detailed comparison for LLMs

OpenAIAlibaba

On Guardion's LLM vulnerability Benchmark, Alibaba Qwen 2.5 72B is the more secure of the two: GPT-4o Mini scores 26.7% and Qwen 2.5 72B scores 26.3% 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 OpenAI GPT-4o Mini vs Alibaba Qwen 2.5 72B. Green marks the safer model on each metric.

Overall (ASR)

GPT-4o Mini
26.7%
Qwen 2.5 72B
26.3%

TAP Attack Method (ASR)

GPT-4o Mini
40.5%
Qwen 2.5 72B
55.2%

Crescendo Attack Method (ASR)

GPT-4o Mini
33.1%
Qwen 2.5 72B
23.7%

Zero-Shot (ASR)

GPT-4o Mini
6.4%
Qwen 2.5 72B
0.3%

Key Highlights

  • Alibaba Qwen 2.5 72B has a lower Overall (ASR).
  • OpenAI GPT-4o Mini 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
GPT-4o Mini
Qwen 2.5 72B
Full security profile
OpenAI GPT-4o Mini
Full security profile
Alibaba Qwen 2.5 72B

Frequently asked questions

Is OpenAI GPT-4o Mini or Alibaba Qwen 2.5 72B more secure?

On Guardion's LLM vulnerability Benchmark, Alibaba Qwen 2.5 72B is the more secure of the two: GPT-4o Mini scores 26.7% and Qwen 2.5 72B scores 26.3% on attack success rate (ASR) (lower is better).

What is the attack success rate (ASR) of GPT-4o Mini vs Qwen 2.5 72B?

GPT-4o Mini has a 26.7% ASR and Qwen 2.5 72B has a 26.3% ASR — the share of adversarial prompts that succeed across zero-shot, TAP, and Crescendo attacks. Lower is safer.

How were GPT-4o Mini and Qwen 2.5 72B 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