Model comparison
Claude 2.1 vs Qwen Max
Qwen Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 34.7 to 25.2 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 2 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 2 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude 2.1 scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen Max in 4 categories; 4 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen Max leads 30.3 to 15.4.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is GPQA Diamond: 33% for Claude 2.1 and 56.1% for Qwen Max.
Side by side
| Claude 2.1 | Qwen Max | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 25.2 | 34.7 |
| Released | 2023-11-21 | 2024-04-03 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | — | 33K |
| Max output | — | 8K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $1.60 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $6.40 |
| Results tracked | 7 | 23 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Qwen Max leads
Claude 2.1: 26.2 (#327), Qwen Max: 30.7 (#292)
| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| Aider Polyglot | — | 21.8% |
| WeirdML | 7.1% | — |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1288 |
Reasoning Qwen Max leads
Claude 2.1: 21.4 (#221), Qwen Max: 25.1 (#151)
| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1269 |
| DTBench | 51% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 119.27 | — |
| ForecastBench | 54.2 | — |
Math Qwen Max leads
Claude 2.1: 10.2 (#315), Qwen Max: 22.3 (#276)
| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 1.9% | 16.1% |
| LMArena Math | — | 1275 |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 67.2% |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 1% |
Knowledge Qwen Max leads
Claude 2.1: 15.4 (#292), Qwen Max: 30.3 (#228)
| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 33% | 56.1% |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1248 |
| MMLU | 73.5% | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
Claude 2.1: —, Qwen Max: 41.8 (#202)
| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1263 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1254 |
| LMArena French | — | 1330 |
| LMArena German | — | 1254 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1205 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1142 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1274 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1290 |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Claude 2.1: —, Qwen Max: 66.5 (#208)
| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1262 |
Long Context Not comparable
Claude 2.1: —, Qwen Max: 39.4 (#180)
| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 66.7% |
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1288 |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Claude 2.1: —, Qwen Max: 47.8 (#205)
| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1282 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1248 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1277 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Claude 2.1 better than Qwen Max?
Qwen Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 34.7 to 25.2 on the Noometry Index.
Is Claude 2.1 or Qwen Max better for coding?
Qwen Max scores higher on coding benchmarks: 30.7 versus 26.2 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Claude 2.1 and Qwen Max share?
2 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude 2.1 has 7 scored results on Noometry and Qwen Max has 23.