Pixtral 12B vs Qwen2-VL-72B: Which is Better for Image Generation?

Introduction

The AI revolution has given rise to a new era of creativity, where text-to-image models are redefining the intersection of art, design, and technology. Pixtral 12B and Qwen2-VL-72B are two pioneering forces driving this transformation, enabling the seamless conversion of text prompts into stunning visuals that captivate, inspire, and inform. Pixtral 12B and Qwen2-VL-72B are making this reality possible, leveraging cutting-edge AI architectures and vast training datasets to transform text into breathtaking visuals. From artistic expressions to commercial applications, these models are reshaping industries and redefining the boundaries of possibility.

In this blog, we’ll conduct an in-depth, hands-on evaluation of Pixtral 12B and Qwen2-VL-72B using Hugging Face Spaces as our testing ground.

Learning Outcomes

• Understand the contrasting strengths of Pixtral 12B and Qwen2-VL-72B in text-to-image generation.
• Evaluate the impact of model size on performance and output quality in AI-driven creativity.
• Identify suitable applications for Pixtral 12B in real-time scenarios versus Qwen2’s strengths in high-end projects.
• Recognize the importance of efficiency and accuracy in selecting AI models for various use cases.
• Analyze hands-on performance results to determine the best model for specific image generation tasks.

This article was published as a part of the Data Science Blogathon.

Comparison of Pixtral 12B and Qwen2-VL-72B

Let us now compare Pixtral 12B and Qwen2-VL-72B in the table below:

Architectural Differences of Pixtral 12B and Qwen2-VL-72B

The table should give you a clearer picture of how these models differ architecturally and how those differences impact their performance and use cases.

Performance Analysis of Pixtral 12B and Qwen2-VL-72B

We’ll conduct an in-depth, hands-on evaluation of Pixtral 12B and Qwen2-VL-72B using Hugging Face Spaces as our testing ground. Both are available for hands-on testing via Hugging Face Spaces, allowing users to explore their capabilities firsthand. You can access them through the following links:

• Pixtral 12B on Hugging Face Spaces
• Qwen2-VL-72B on Hugging Face Spaces

Task 1: Give Python code for below flowchart

Pixtral 12B

# Function to determine if one can afford to live alone
def can_afford_to_live_alone(hourly_pay, hours_per_week):
    # Calculate weekly pay
    weekly_pay = hourly_pay * hours_per_week

    # Determine if weekly pay is greater than 400
    if weekly_pay > 400:
        return "can afford to live alone"
    else:
        return "can't afford to live alone"

# Main function to execute the flowchart
def main():
    # Input hourly pay and hours per week
    hourly_pay = float(input("Enter hourly pay: "))
    hours_per_week = float(input("Enter hours per week: "))

    # Determine if one can afford to live alone
    result = can_afford_to_live_alone(hourly_pay, hours_per_week)

    # Output the result
    print(result)

# Execute the main function
if __name__ == "__main__":
    main()

Qwen2-VL-72B

# Start
hourly_pay = float(input("Enter your hourly pay: "))
hours_per_week = float(input("Enter the number of hours you work per week: "))

# Calculate weekly pay
weekly_pay = hourly_pay * hours_per_week

# Check if weekly pay is greater than 400
if weekly_pay > 400:
    print("You can afford to live alone.")
else:
    print("You can't afford to live alone.")

# End

Winner- Pixtral 12B

Pixtral 12B Code Snippet is better because it follows good programming practices by using functions to separate logic and improve readability and maintainability. This modular approach makes the code easier to extend, test, and debug. For simple scripts, the Qwen2-VL-72B snippet might be sufficient, but for more complex scenarios or larger projects, the first snippet’s structure is preferable.

Task 2: Convert the image to CSV format

Pixtral 12B

Qwen2-VL-72B

Winner- Qwen2-VL-72B

Qwen2-VL-72B provided the better output. It correctly formatted the CSV without extra headers, ensuring that the data aligns properly with the columns. This makes it easier to use and analyze the data directly from the CSV file.

Task 3: Tell me the input fields in this image

Pixtral 12B

Qwen2-VL-72B

Winner: Pixtral 12B

Both models identified the input field but Pixtral AI emerged as a winner by providing detailed and comprehensive information about the image and identifying the input fields.

Task 4: Explain this image 

Pixtral 12B

Qwen2-VL-72B

Winner: Pixtral 12B

Both models could identify that the cat was running in the image. But Pixtral gave a more appropriate explanation with completely relatable information.

Performance Rating

Based on the performance, Pixtral emerged as the winner in 3 out of 4 tasks, showcasing its strength in accuracy and detail despite being a smaller model (12B) compared to Qwen2-VL-72B. The overall rating can be summarized as follows:

• Pixtral 12B: Demonstrated strong capability in providing detailed, context-aware, and accurate descriptions, outperforming Qwen2 in most tasks despite its smaller size. Its ability to deliver precise information consistently gives it a higher rating in this comparison.
• Qwen2-VL-72B: Although larger, it struggled with accuracy in key tasks. Its performance was strong in terms of providing general descriptions but lacked the depth and precision of Pixtral.

Overall Rating

• Pixtral 12B: 4.5/5
• Qwen2-VL-72B: 3.5/5

Pixtral’s ability to outperform a much larger model indicates its efficiency and focus on delivering accurate results.

Conclusion

In the rapidly evolving landscape of AI-driven creativity, Pixtral 12B and Qwen2-VL-72B represent two distinct approaches to text-to-image generation, each with its strengths. Through hands-on evaluation, it’s clear that Pixtral 12B, despite being a smaller model, consistently delivers accurate and detailed results, particularly excelling in tasks that prioritize speed and precision. It is an ideal choice for real-time applications, offering a balance between efficiency and output quality. Meanwhile, Qwen2-VL-72B, while powerful and capable of handling more complex and nuanced tasks, falls short in some areas, mainly due to its larger size and need for more advanced hardware.

The comparison between the two models highlights that bigger doesn’t always mean better. Pixtral 12B proves that well-optimized, smaller models can outperform larger ones in certain contexts, especially when speed and accessibility are critical.

Key Takeaways

• Pixtral 12B shines in speed and accuracy, making it suitable for real-time applications and general tasks where quick and efficient results are essential.
• Qwen2-VL-72B is more suited for complex, high-end creative tasks, but its size and resource demands may limit accessibility for everyday users.
• Pixtral outperformed Qwen2 in 3 out of 4 tasks, demonstrating that model size is not the sole factor in determining performance.
• Real-world use cases—such as those in marketing, mobile apps, and design—might benefit more from Pixtral’s efficiency, while large-scale projects with a need for intricate detail may favor Qwen2.

Frequently Asked Questions

The media shown in this article is not owned by Analytics Vidhya and is used at the Author’s discretion.

neha3786214 21 Sep, 2024

I'm Neha Dwivedi, a Data Science enthusiast working at SymphonyTech and a Graduate of MIT World Peace University. I'm passionate about data analysis and machine learning. I'm excited to share insights and learn from this community!