Noometry

Model comparison

Claude Opus 4.1 vs Qwen1.5-7B

Claude Opus 4.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.8 to 30.8 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 12 shared benchmarks.

Claude Opus 4.1 Anthropic

40.8

Rank #136 Confirmed

Qwen1.5-7B Alibaba (Qwen)

30.8

Rank #270 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 4.1 scores higher in 7 categories and Qwen1.5-7B in 1 category; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Claude Opus 4.1 leads 62.6 to 29.8.
  • Qwen1.5-7B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Claude Opus 4.1Qwen1.5-7B
ProviderAnthropicAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index40.830.8
Released2025-08-052024-02-04
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window200K—
Max output32K—
Input $ / M tokens$15—
Output $ / M tokens$75—
Results tracked4813

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

Category by category

Coding Claude Opus 4.1 leads

Claude Opus 4.1: 44.3 (#69), Qwen1.5-7B: 31.6 (#271)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Qwen1.5-7B
LMArena Coding14791107
SWE-bench Verified73.3%—
LMArena WebDev1390—
WeirdML45.9%—
ALE-Bench674.77—
AlgoTune1.34—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.1: 34.8 (#38), Qwen1.5-7B: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Qwen1.5-7B
Terminal-Bench38%—
GDPval43.6%—
Cybench42%—
DeepResearch Bench48.3%—
LMArena Search1148—
METR Time Horizons66.8%—

Reasoning Claude Opus 4.1 leads

Claude Opus 4.1: 31.6 (#70), Qwen1.5-7B: 19.5 (#237)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Qwen1.5-7B
LMArena Hard Prompts14431066
SimpleBench60%—
Chess Puzzles7%—
EnigmaEval7.2%—
EBR-Bench7.9%—
Mystery Game Puzzles21%—
DTBench80%—
LMCA37.1%—
Epoch Capabilities Index144.11—
ForecastBench62—

Math Qwen1.5-7B leads

Claude Opus 4.1: 22.0 (#267), Qwen1.5-7B: 29.0 (#222)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Qwen1.5-7B
LMArena Math14301080
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)12.6%—
FrontierMath Tier 42.4%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202568.9%—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)7.2%—
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)4.2%—

Knowledge Claude Opus 4.1 leads

Claude Opus 4.1: 41.9 (#93), Qwen1.5-7B: 28.2 (#239)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Qwen1.5-7B
LMArena Expert14391055
GPQA Diamond77.3%—
Humanity's Last Exam11.5%—
Confabulations17.1%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate11.8%—
MMLU—62.6%

Multimodal Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.1: 26.2 (#114), Qwen1.5-7B: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Qwen1.5-7B
VPCT35%—

Multilingual Claude Opus 4.1 leads

Claude Opus 4.1: 52.1 (#90), Qwen1.5-7B: 28.6 (#266)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Qwen1.5-7B
LMArena Non-English14051058
LMArena Chinese14271140
LMArena Russian14211006
LMArena French1432—
LMArena German1412—
LMArena Japanese1378—
LMArena Korean1381—
LMArena Spanish1448—

Instruction Following Claude Opus 4.1 leads

Claude Opus 4.1: 75.8 (#53), Qwen1.5-7B: 54.4 (#276)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Qwen1.5-7B
LMArena Instruction Following14361058

Long Context Claude Opus 4.1 leads

Claude Opus 4.1: 44.5 (#60), Qwen1.5-7B: 33.1 (#261)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Qwen1.5-7B
LMArena Longer Query14551090

Writing & Preference Claude Opus 4.1 leads

Claude Opus 4.1: 62.6 (#70), Qwen1.5-7B: 29.8 (#288)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Qwen1.5-7B
LMArena Text14191084
LMArena Creative Writing14121035
LMArena Multi-Turn14441061
Short-Story Creative Writing84.7%—

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Opus 4.1 better than Qwen1.5-7B?

Claude Opus 4.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.8 to 30.8 on the Noometry Index.

Is Claude Opus 4.1 or Qwen1.5-7B better for coding?

Claude Opus 4.1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 44.3 versus 31.6 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 4.1 and Qwen1.5-7B share?

12 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 4.1 has 48 scored results on Noometry and Qwen1.5-7B has 13.

Related comparisons

Go deeper