Noometry

Model comparison

Claude Opus 4.1 vs Qwen2-72B

Claude Opus 4.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.8 to 29.5 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 21 shared benchmarks.

Claude Opus 4.1 Anthropic

40.8

Rank #136 Confirmed

Qwen2-72B Alibaba (Qwen)

29.5

Rank #294 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 21 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 4.1 scores higher in 8 categories and Qwen2-72B in 1 category; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Claude Opus 4.1 leads 62.6 to 41.0.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is GPQA Diamond: 77.3% for Claude Opus 4.1 and 40.8% for Qwen2-72B.
  • Qwen2-72B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Claude Opus 4.1Qwen2-72B
ProviderAnthropicAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index40.829.5
Released2025-08-052024-06-07
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window200K—
Max output32K—
Input $ / M tokens$15—
Output $ / M tokens$75—
Results tracked4826

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), Qwen2-72B: 28.7 (#303)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Qwen2-72B
WeirdML45.9%11.3%
LMArena Coding14791196
SWE-bench Verified73.3%—
LMArena WebDev1390—
BigCodeBench Instruct—38.5%
BigCodeBench Complete—54%
ALE-Bench674.77—
AlgoTune1.34—

Agentic & Tool Use Claude Opus 4.1 leads

Claude Opus 4.1: 34.8 (#38), Qwen2-72B: 16.9 (#138)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Qwen2-72B
METR Time Horizons66.8%29.9%
Terminal-Bench38%—
GDPval43.6%—
TheAgentCompany—1.1%
Cybench42%—
DeepResearch Bench48.3%—
LMArena Search1148—

Reasoning Claude Opus 4.1 leads

Claude Opus 4.1: 31.6 (#70), Qwen2-72B: 22.2 (#184)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Qwen2-72B
LMArena Hard Prompts14431191
Epoch Capabilities Index144.11125.27
SimpleBench60%—
Chess Puzzles7%—
EnigmaEval7.2%—
EBR-Bench7.9%—
Mystery Game Puzzles21%—
DTBench80%—
LMCA37.1%—
ForecastBench62—

Math Qwen2-72B leads

Claude Opus 4.1: 22.0 (#267), Qwen2-72B: 27.9 (#232)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Qwen2-72B
LMArena Math14301235
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)12.6%—
FrontierMath Tier 42.4%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202568.9%—
MATH Level 5—39.1%
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), Qwen2-72B: 21.2 (#270)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Qwen2-72B
GPQA Diamond77.3%40.8%
LMArena Expert14391171
Humanity's Last Exam11.5%—
Confabulations17.1%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate11.8%—
MMLU—82.4%

Multimodal Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.1: 26.2 (#114), Qwen2-72B: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Qwen2-72B
VPCT35%—

Multilingual Claude Opus 4.1 leads

Claude Opus 4.1: 52.1 (#90), Qwen2-72B: 36.0 (#239)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Qwen2-72B
LMArena Non-English14051176
LMArena Chinese14271240
LMArena French14321169
LMArena German14121151
LMArena Japanese13781111
LMArena Korean13811083
LMArena Russian14211169
LMArena Spanish14481168

Instruction Following Claude Opus 4.1 leads

Claude Opus 4.1: 75.8 (#53), Qwen2-72B: 62.0 (#236)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Qwen2-72B
LMArena Instruction Following14361181

Long Context Claude Opus 4.1 leads

Claude Opus 4.1: 44.5 (#60), Qwen2-72B: 36.1 (#230)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Qwen2-72B
LMArena Longer Query14551193

Writing & Preference Claude Opus 4.1 leads

Claude Opus 4.1: 62.6 (#70), Qwen2-72B: 41.0 (#236)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Qwen2-72B
LMArena Text14191203
LMArena Creative Writing14121181
LMArena Multi-Turn14441195
Short-Story Creative Writing84.7%—

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Opus 4.1 better than Qwen2-72B?

Claude Opus 4.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.8 to 29.5 on the Noometry Index.

Is Claude Opus 4.1 or Qwen2-72B better for coding?

Claude Opus 4.1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 44.3 versus 28.7 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 4.1 and Qwen2-72B share?

21 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 4.1 has 48 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2-72B has 26.

Related comparisons

Go deeper