Model comparison
Claude Opus 4.5 vs Qwen2.5-Max
Claude Opus 4.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.5 to 40.1 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 18 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 18 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 4.5 scores higher in 8 categories and Qwen2.5-Max in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Claude Opus 4.5 leads 56.4 to 34.8.
Side by side
| Claude Opus 4.5 | Qwen2.5-Max | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 50.5 | 40.1 |
| Released | 2025-11-01 | 2025-01-25 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | 200K | — |
| Max output | 64K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $5 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $25 | — |
| Results tracked | 69 | 27 |
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: 55.4 (#21), Qwen2.5-Max: 41.2 (#118)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.5 | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1504 | 1359 |
| SWE-bench Verified | 76.7% | — |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 76.8% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1493 | — |
| SWE-bench Multilingual | 70.7% | — |
| GSO | 26.5% | — |
| WeirdML | 63.7% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | — | 64.4% |
| ALE-Bench | 1,025 | — |
| AlgoTune | 1.77 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Claude Opus 4.5: 47.2 (#11), Qwen2.5-Max: —
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.5 | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | 63.1% | — |
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 77.5% | — |
| GDPval | 45.5% | — |
| Remote Labor Index | 3.8% | — |
| τ²-bench Airline | 84% | — |
| τ²-bench Banking | 24.7% | — |
| τ²-bench Retail | 79.6% | — |
| τ²-bench Telecom | 92.3% | — |
| Cybench | 82% | — |
| DeepResearch Bench | 54.8% | — |
| OSWorld | 66.3% | — |
| BALROG | 43.5% | — |
| LMArena Search | 1180 | — |
| METR Time Horizons | 75% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 4,967 | — |
Reasoning Claude Opus 4.5 leads
Claude Opus 4.5: 42.5 (#43), Qwen2.5-Max: 24.6 (#144)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.5 | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1476 | 1360 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 150.1 | 132.54 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 37.6% | — |
| SimpleBench | 62% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 80.2% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 52.5% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 80% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 12% | — |
| EnigmaEval | 11.9% | — |
| EBR-Bench | 14.3% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | — | 51.4% |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 22% | — |
| DTBench | 89.9% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | — | 67.9% |
| LMCA | 44.5% | — |
| ForecastBench | 60.7 | — |
| LiveBench | — | 62.3% |
Math Claude Opus 4.5 leads
Claude Opus 4.5: 38.5 (#85), Qwen2.5-Max: 34.3 (#162)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.5 | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1463 | 1369 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 34.4% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 4.9% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 86.1% | — |
| ProofBench | 36% | — |
| LiveBench Math | — | 58.4% |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 20.7% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 4.2% | — |
Knowledge Claude Opus 4.5 leads
Claude Opus 4.5: 56.4 (#38), Qwen2.5-Max: 34.8 (#181)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.5 | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1488 | 1337 |
| GPQA Diamond | 86% | — |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 25.2% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | 45.7% | — |
| Confabulations | — | 21.8% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 10.9% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Claude Opus 4.5: 31.1 (#99), Qwen2.5-Max: —
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.5 | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| GeoBench | 75% | — |
| VPCT | 40% | — |
| Furniture Assembly | 28.3% | — |
| LMArena Document | 1462 | — |
Multilingual Claude Opus 4.5 leads
Claude Opus 4.5: 54.5 (#45), Qwen2.5-Max: 48.3 (#140)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.5 | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1438 | 1352 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1470 | 1382 |
| LMArena French | 1471 | 1396 |
| LMArena German | 1449 | 1350 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1415 | 1299 |
| LMArena Korean | 1424 | 1304 |
| LMArena Russian | 1448 | 1353 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1455 | 1377 |
Instruction Following Claude Opus 4.5 leads
Claude Opus 4.5: 77.7 (#20), Qwen2.5-Max: 71.5 (#147)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.5 | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1478 | 1335 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | — | 75.3% |
Long Context Claude Opus 4.5 leads
Claude Opus 4.5: 46.4 (#21), Qwen2.5-Max: 41.3 (#137)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.5 | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1480 | 1358 |
| CL-bench | 21.1% | — |
Writing & Preference Claude Opus 4.5 leads
Claude Opus 4.5: 68.2 (#28), Qwen2.5-Max: 55.6 (#141)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.5 | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1451 | 1367 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1445 | 1339 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1466 | 1364 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | — | 72.9% |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1687 | — |
| LiveBench Language | — | 56.3% |
Frequently asked questions
Is Claude Opus 4.5 better than Qwen2.5-Max?
Claude Opus 4.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.5 to 40.1 on the Noometry Index.
Is Claude Opus 4.5 or Qwen2.5-Max better for coding?
Claude Opus 4.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 55.4 versus 41.2 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 4.5 and Qwen2.5-Max share?
18 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 4.5 has 69 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5-Max has 27.