Model comparison

Claude 2.1 vs Qwen3.7 Max

Qwen3.7 Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.5 to 25.2 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 4 shared benchmarks.

Claude 2.1 Anthropic

25.2

Rank #345 Reported

Qwen3.7 Max Alibaba (Qwen)

51.5

Rank #42 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 4 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude 2.1 scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3.7 Max in 4 categories; 4 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where Qwen3.7 Max leads 62.4 to 10.2.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 1.9% for Claude 2.1 and 95.6% for Qwen3.7 Max.

Side by side

Claude 2.1 and Qwen3.7 Max specifications
Claude 2.1Qwen3.7 Max
ProviderAnthropicAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index25.251.5
Released2023-11-212026-05-19
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
Context window—1M
Max output—131K
Input $ / M tokens—$2.50
Output $ / M tokens—$7.50
Results tracked733

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding Qwen3.7 Max leads

Claude 2.1: 26.2 (#327), Qwen3.7 Max: 50.4 (#45)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude 2.1Qwen3.7 Max
SWE-bench Verified—77.3%
LMArena WebDev—1515
SciCode—48.8%
WeirdML7.1%—
LMArena Coding—1498
ALE-Bench—1,189

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Claude 2.1: —, Qwen3.7 Max: 22.1 (#135)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude 2.1Qwen3.7 Max
GBAEval—0.4%

Reasoning Qwen3.7 Max leads

Claude 2.1: 21.4 (#221), Qwen3.7 Max: 49.2 (#38)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude 2.1Qwen3.7 Max
DTBench51%92.3%
Epoch Capabilities Index119.27153.68
SimpleBench—70.4%
NYT Connections (extended)—85.1%
CritPt—13.4%
Chess Puzzles—19%
EBR-Bench—9.5%
LMArena Hard Prompts—1483
Mystery Game Puzzles—32%
LMCA—44%
ForecastBench54.2—

Math Qwen3.7 Max leads

Claude 2.1: 10.2 (#315), Qwen3.7 Max: 62.4 (#32)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude 2.1Qwen3.7 Max
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-20251.9%95.6%
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)—64.6%
FrontierMath Tier 4—34.1%
ProofBench—26%
LMArena Math—1490

Knowledge Qwen3.7 Max leads

Claude 2.1: 15.4 (#292), Qwen3.7 Max: 61.6 (#28)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude 2.1Qwen3.7 Max
GPQA Diamond33%90.9%
SimpleQA Verified—55.8%
LMArena Expert—1488
MMLU73.5%—

Multilingual Not comparable

Claude 2.1: —, Qwen3.7 Max: 56.9 (#15)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude 2.1Qwen3.7 Max
LMArena Non-English—1474
LMArena Chinese—1530
LMArena Russian—1484

Instruction Following Not comparable

Claude 2.1: —, Qwen3.7 Max: 76.7 (#38)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude 2.1Qwen3.7 Max
LMArena Instruction Following—1460

Long Context Not comparable

Claude 2.1: —, Qwen3.7 Max: 45.4 (#40)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude 2.1Qwen3.7 Max
LMArena Longer Query—1482

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Claude 2.1: —, Qwen3.7 Max: 65.0 (#54)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude 2.1Qwen3.7 Max
LMArena Text—1476
LMArena Creative Writing—1449
EQ-Bench 4—1110
LMArena Multi-Turn—1481

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude 2.1 better than Qwen3.7 Max?

Qwen3.7 Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.5 to 25.2 on the Noometry Index.

Is Claude 2.1 or Qwen3.7 Max better for coding?

Qwen3.7 Max scores higher on coding benchmarks: 50.4 versus 26.2 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Claude 2.1 and Qwen3.7 Max share?

4 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude 2.1 has 7 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.7 Max has 33.

Related comparisons

Go deeper