Model comparison
Claude 2.1 vs Qwen3.7 Plus
Qwen3.7 Plus is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.3 to 25.2 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 4 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 4 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude 2.1 scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3.7 Plus in 4 categories; 4 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Qwen3.7 Plus leads 50.5 to 10.2.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 1.9% for Claude 2.1 and 93.3% for Qwen3.7 Plus.
Side by side
| Claude 2.1 | Qwen3.7 Plus | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 25.2 | 45.3 |
| Released | 2023-11-21 | 2026-06-02 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | — | 1M |
| Max output | — | 131K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.40 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $1.60 |
| Results tracked | 7 | 32 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Qwen3.7 Plus leads
Claude 2.1: 26.2 (#327), Qwen3.7 Plus: 36.6 (#206)
| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierCode | — | 10.2% |
| SciCode | — | 45.5% |
| WeirdML | 7.1% | — |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1473 |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Claude 2.1: —, Qwen3.7 Plus: 21.4 (#138)
| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| OSWorld 2.0 | — | 2.8% |
Reasoning Qwen3.7 Plus leads
Claude 2.1: 21.4 (#221), Qwen3.7 Plus: 39.3 (#59)
| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| DTBench | 51% | 84% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 119.27 | 147.37 |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 74.8% |
| CritPt | — | 9.1% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 24% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1460 |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 17% |
| LMCA | — | 37.6% |
| ForecastBench | 54.2 | — |
Math Qwen3.7 Plus leads
Claude 2.1: 10.2 (#315), Qwen3.7 Plus: 50.5 (#56)
| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 1.9% | 93.3% |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 34.4% |
| LMArena Math | — | 1466 |
Knowledge Qwen3.7 Plus leads
Claude 2.1: 15.4 (#292), Qwen3.7 Plus: 54.9 (#51)
| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 33% | 87.9% |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1467 |
| MMLU | 73.5% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Claude 2.1: —, Qwen3.7 Plus: 41.8 (#33)
| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1279 |
| LMArena Document | — | 1444 |
Multilingual Not comparable
Claude 2.1: —, Qwen3.7 Plus: 54.8 (#38)
| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1445 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1510 |
| LMArena French | — | 1473 |
| LMArena German | — | 1471 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1413 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1415 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1457 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1457 |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Claude 2.1: —, Qwen3.7 Plus: 75.8 (#52)
| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1440 |
Long Context Not comparable
Claude 2.1: —, Qwen3.7 Plus: 44.5 (#65)
| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1455 |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Claude 2.1: —, Qwen3.7 Plus: 64.3 (#56)
| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1455 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1439 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1460 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Claude 2.1 better than Qwen3.7 Plus?
Qwen3.7 Plus is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.3 to 25.2 on the Noometry Index.
Is Claude 2.1 or Qwen3.7 Plus better for coding?
Qwen3.7 Plus scores higher on coding benchmarks: 36.6 versus 26.2 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Claude 2.1 and Qwen3.7 Plus share?
4 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude 2.1 has 7 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.7 Plus has 32.