Noometry

Model comparison

Claude Opus 4.1 vs Qwen3-1.7B

Claude Opus 4.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.8 to 26.2 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 3 shared benchmarks.

Claude Opus 4.1 Anthropic

40.8

Rank #136 Confirmed

Qwen3-1.7B Alibaba (Qwen)

26.2

Rank #331 Reported

Summary

  • They share 3 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 4.1 scores higher in 4 categories and Qwen3-1.7B in 0 categories; 4 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where Claude Opus 4.1 leads 41.9 to 19.6.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 68.9% for Claude Opus 4.1 and 8.1% for Qwen3-1.7B.
  • Qwen3-1.7B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Claude Opus 4.1Qwen3-1.7B
ProviderAnthropicAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index40.826.2
Released2025-08-052025-04-29
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window200K—
Max output32K—
Input $ / M tokens$15—
Output $ / M tokens$75—
Results tracked484

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

Category by category

Coding Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.1: 44.3 (#69), Qwen3-1.7B: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Qwen3-1.7B
SWE-bench Verified73.3%—
LMArena WebDev1390—
WeirdML45.9%—
LMArena Coding1479—
ALE-Bench674.77—
AlgoTune1.34—

Agentic & Tool Use Claude Opus 4.1 leads

Claude Opus 4.1: 34.8 (#38), Qwen3-1.7B: 24.5 (#108)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Qwen3-1.7B
Terminal-Bench38%—
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard—28.4%
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), Qwen3-1.7B: 18.5 (#263)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Qwen3-1.7B
Chess Puzzles7%0%
SimpleBench60%—
EnigmaEval7.2%—
EBR-Bench7.9%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1443—
Mystery Game Puzzles21%—
DTBench80%—
LMCA37.1%—
Epoch Capabilities Index144.11—
ForecastBench62—

Math Claude Opus 4.1 leads

Claude Opus 4.1: 22.0 (#267), Qwen3-1.7B: 15.4 (#288)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Qwen3-1.7B
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202568.9%8.1%
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)12.6%—
FrontierMath Tier 42.4%—
LMArena Math1430—
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), Qwen3-1.7B: 19.6 (#273)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Qwen3-1.7B
GPQA Diamond77.3%38%
Humanity's Last Exam11.5%—
Confabulations17.1%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate11.8%—
LMArena Expert1439—

Multimodal Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.1: 26.2 (#114), Qwen3-1.7B: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Qwen3-1.7B
VPCT35%—

Multilingual Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.1: 52.1 (#90), Qwen3-1.7B: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Qwen3-1.7B
LMArena Non-English1405—
LMArena Chinese1427—
LMArena French1432—
LMArena German1412—
LMArena Japanese1378—
LMArena Korean1381—
LMArena Russian1421—
LMArena Spanish1448—

Instruction Following Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.1: 75.8 (#53), Qwen3-1.7B: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Qwen3-1.7B
LMArena Instruction Following1436—

Long Context Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.1: 44.5 (#60), Qwen3-1.7B: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Qwen3-1.7B
LMArena Longer Query1455—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.1: 62.6 (#70), Qwen3-1.7B: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Qwen3-1.7B
LMArena Text1419—
LMArena Creative Writing1412—
Short-Story Creative Writing84.7%—
LMArena Multi-Turn1444—

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Opus 4.1 better than Qwen3-1.7B?

Claude Opus 4.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.8 to 26.2 on the Noometry Index.

How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 4.1 and Qwen3-1.7B share?

3 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 4.1 has 48 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3-1.7B has 4.

Related comparisons

Go deeper