Model comparison

Claude Opus 4.5 vs Qwen Max

Claude Opus 4.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.5 to 34.7 on the Noometry Index. Qwen Max costs 3.6× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 4.5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 20 shared benchmarks.

Claude Opus 4.5 Anthropic

50.5

Rank #47 Confirmed

Qwen Max Alibaba (Qwen)

34.7

Rank #230 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 20 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 4.5 scores higher in 8 categories and Qwen Max in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where Claude Opus 4.5 leads 56.5 to 30.3.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 86.1% for Claude Opus 4.5 and 16.1% for Qwen Max.
  • Qwen Max is cheaper at $1.60 / $6.40 per million input/output tokens, against $5 / $25 for Claude Opus 4.5.
  • Claude Opus 4.5 accepts more context: 200K tokens versus 33K.

Side by side

Claude Opus 4.5 and Qwen Max specifications
Claude Opus 4.5Qwen Max
ProviderAnthropicAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index50.534.7
Released2025-11-012024-04-03
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
Context window200K33K
Max output64K8K
Input $ / M tokens$5$1.60
Output $ / M tokens$25$6.40
Results tracked6923

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

Category by category

Coding Claude Opus 4.5 leads

Claude Opus 4.5: 54.8 (#27), Qwen Max: 30.7 (#292)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Qwen Max
LMArena Coding15041288
SWE-bench Verified76.7%—
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)76.8%—
Aider Polyglot—21.8%
LMArena WebDev1494—
SWE-bench Multilingual70.7%—
GSO26.5%—
WeirdML63.7%—
ALE-Bench1,025—
AlgoTune1.77—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.5: 47.3 (#12), Qwen Max: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Qwen Max
Terminal-Bench63.1%—
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard77.5%—
GDPval45.5%—
Remote Labor Index3.8%—
τ²-bench Airline84%—
τ²-bench Banking24.7%—
τ²-bench Retail79.6%—
τ²-bench Telecom92.3%—
Cybench82%—
DeepResearch Bench54.8%—
OSWorld66.3%—
BALROG43.5%—
LMArena Search1180—
METR Time Horizons75%—
Vending-Bench 24,967—

Reasoning Claude Opus 4.5 leads

Claude Opus 4.5: 42.6 (#51), Qwen Max: 25.1 (#151)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Qwen Max
LMArena Hard Prompts14761269
ARC-AGI-237.6%—
SimpleBench62%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark80.2%—
NYT Connections (extended)52.5%—
ARC-AGI-180%—
Chess Puzzles12%—
EnigmaEval11.9%—
EBR-Bench14.3%—
Mystery Game Puzzles22%—
DTBench89.9%—
LMCA44.5%—
Epoch Capabilities Index150.09—
ForecastBench60.7—

Math Claude Opus 4.5 leads

Claude Opus 4.5: 38.6 (#132), Qwen Max: 22.3 (#276)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Qwen Max
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202586.1%16.1%
LMArena Math14631275
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)20.7%1%
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)34.4%—
FrontierMath Tier 44.9%—
ProofBench36%—
MATH Level 5—67.2%
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)4.2%—

Knowledge Claude Opus 4.5 leads

Claude Opus 4.5: 56.5 (#44), Qwen Max: 30.3 (#228)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Qwen Max
GPQA Diamond86%56.1%
LMArena Expert14871248
Humanity's Last Exam25.2%—
SimpleQA Verified45.7%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate10.9%—

Multimodal Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.5: 31.4 (#107), Qwen Max: —

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Qwen Max
GeoBench75%—
VPCT40%—
Furniture Assembly28.3%—
LMArena Document1462—

Multilingual Claude Opus 4.5 leads

Claude Opus 4.5: 54.3 (#47), Qwen Max: 41.8 (#202)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Qwen Max
LMArena Non-English14381263
LMArena Chinese14701254
LMArena French14711330
LMArena German14491254
LMArena Japanese14161205
LMArena Korean14241142
LMArena Russian14471274
LMArena Spanish14581290

Instruction Following Claude Opus 4.5 leads

Claude Opus 4.5: 77.5 (#19), Qwen Max: 66.5 (#208)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Qwen Max
LMArena Instruction Following14781262

Long Context Claude Opus 4.5 leads

Claude Opus 4.5: 46.5 (#22), Qwen Max: 39.4 (#180)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Qwen Max
LMArena Longer Query14801288
Fiction.LiveBench—66.7%
CL-bench21.1%—

Writing & Preference Claude Opus 4.5 leads

Claude Opus 4.5: 68.1 (#28), Qwen Max: 47.8 (#205)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Qwen Max
LMArena Text14511282
LMArena Creative Writing14451248
LMArena Multi-Turn14661277
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1687—

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Opus 4.5 better than Qwen Max?

Claude Opus 4.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.5 to 34.7 on the Noometry Index. Qwen Max costs 3.6× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 4.5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.5 or Qwen Max?

Qwen Max is cheaper. It lists at $1.60 per million input tokens and $6.40 per million output tokens; Claude Opus 4.5 lists at $5 and $25.

Is Claude Opus 4.5 or Qwen Max better for coding?

Claude Opus 4.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 54.8 versus 30.7 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Claude Opus 4.5 does, with 200K tokens against 33K.

How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 4.5 and Qwen Max share?

20 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 4.5 has 69 scored results on Noometry and Qwen Max has 23.

Related comparisons

Go deeper