Model comparison
Claude 2.1 vs Qwen Plus
Qwen Plus is the stronger model overall, scoring 37.1 to 25.2 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 3 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 3 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude 2.1 scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen Plus in 4 categories; 4 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Qwen Plus leads 23.3 to 10.2.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is DTBench: 51% for Claude 2.1 and 81.1% for Qwen Plus.
Side by side
| Claude 2.1 | Qwen Plus | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 25.2 | 37.1 |
| Released | 2023-11-21 | 2024-01-25 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | — | 1M |
| Max output | — | 33K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.40 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $1.20 |
| Results tracked | 7 | 20 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Qwen Plus leads
Claude 2.1: 26.2 (#327), Qwen Plus: 38.9 (#167)
| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| WeirdML | 7.1% | — |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1328 |
Reasoning Qwen Plus leads
Claude 2.1: 21.4 (#221), Qwen Plus: 28.4 (#107)
| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| DTBench | 51% | 81.1% |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 63.3% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1317 |
| LMCA | — | 24% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 119.27 | — |
| ForecastBench | 54.2 | — |
Math Qwen Plus leads
Claude 2.1: 10.2 (#315), Qwen Plus: 23.3 (#271)
| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 1.9% | 17.8% |
| LMArena Math | — | 1326 |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 65.3% |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 1.7% |
Knowledge Qwen Plus leads
Claude 2.1: 15.4 (#292), Qwen Plus: 27.4 (#251)
| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 33% | 48.1% |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1328 |
| MMLU | 73.5% | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
Claude 2.1: —, Qwen Plus: 45.1 (#175)
| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1310 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1347 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1251 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1323 |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Claude 2.1: —, Qwen Plus: 68.8 (#181)
| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1303 |
Long Context Not comparable
Claude 2.1: —, Qwen Plus: 40.3 (#158)
| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1324 |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Claude 2.1: —, Qwen Plus: 52.2 (#176)
| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1326 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1293 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1336 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Claude 2.1 better than Qwen Plus?
Qwen Plus is the stronger model overall, scoring 37.1 to 25.2 on the Noometry Index.
Is Claude 2.1 or Qwen Plus better for coding?
Qwen Plus scores higher on coding benchmarks: 38.9 versus 26.2 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Claude 2.1 and Qwen Plus share?
3 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude 2.1 has 7 scored results on Noometry and Qwen Plus has 20.