Noometry

Model comparison

Claude Opus 4.5 vs Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct

Claude Opus 4.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.5 to 29.9 on the Noometry Index. Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct costs 2.4× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 4.5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 3 shared benchmarks.

Claude Opus 4.5 Anthropic

50.5

Rank #47 Confirmed

Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct Alibaba (Qwen)

29.9

Rank #302 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 3 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 4.5 scores higher in 2 categories and Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct in 1 category; 3 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in agentic & tool use, where Claude Opus 4.5 leads 47.3 to 18.6.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is OSWorld: 66.3% for Claude Opus 4.5 and 5% for Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct.
  • Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct is cheaper at $2.80 / $8.40 per million input/output tokens, against $5 / $25 for Claude Opus 4.5.
  • Claude Opus 4.5 accepts more context: 200K tokens versus 131K.
  • Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Claude Opus 4.5Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct
ProviderAnthropicAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index50.529.9
Released2025-11-012024-09
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window200K131K
Max output64K8K
Input $ / M tokens$5$2.80
Output $ / M tokens$25$8.40
Results tracked696

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

Category by category

Coding Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.5: 54.8 (#27), Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct
SWE-bench Verified76.7%—
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)76.8%—
LMArena WebDev1494—
SWE-bench Multilingual70.7%—
GSO26.5%—
WeirdML63.7%—
LMArena Coding1504—
ALE-Bench1,025—
AlgoTune1.77—

Agentic & Tool Use Claude Opus 4.5 leads

Claude Opus 4.5: 47.3 (#12), Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct: 18.6 (#144)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct
OSWorld66.3%5%
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%—
BALROG43.5%—
LMArena Search1180—
METR Time Horizons75%—
Vending-Bench 24,967—

Reasoning Claude Opus 4.5 leads

Claude Opus 4.5: 42.6 (#51), Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct: 20.7 (#233)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct
Kagi LLM Benchmark80.2%36%
ARC-AGI-237.6%—
SimpleBench62%—
NYT Connections (extended)52.5%—
ARC-AGI-180%—
Chess Puzzles12%—
EnigmaEval11.9%—
EBR-Bench14.3%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1476—
Mystery Game Puzzles22%—
DTBench89.9%—
LMCA44.5%—
Epoch Capabilities Index150.09—
ForecastBench60.7—

Math Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.5: 38.6 (#132), Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)34.4%—
FrontierMath Tier 44.9%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202586.1%—
ProofBench36%—
LMArena Math1463—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)20.7%—
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)4.2%—

Knowledge Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.5: 56.5 (#44), Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct
GPQA Diamond86%—
Humanity's Last Exam25.2%—
SimpleQA Verified45.7%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate10.9%—
LMArena Expert1487—

Multimodal Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct leads

Claude Opus 4.5: 31.4 (#107), Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct: 33.5 (#97)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct
GeoBench75%62%
LMArena Vision—1107
Video-MME—73.5%
VPCT40%—
Furniture Assembly28.3%—
LMArena Document1462—
SpatialViz-Bench—33.3%

Multilingual Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.5: 54.3 (#47), Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct
LMArena Non-English1438—
LMArena Chinese1470—
LMArena French1471—
LMArena German1449—
LMArena Japanese1416—
LMArena Korean1424—
LMArena Russian1447—
LMArena Spanish1458—

Instruction Following Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.5: 77.5 (#19), Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct
LMArena Instruction Following1478—

Long Context Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.5: 46.5 (#22), Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct
CL-bench21.1%—
LMArena Longer Query1480—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.5: 68.1 (#28), Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct
LMArena Text1451—
LMArena Creative Writing1445—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1687—
LMArena Multi-Turn1466—

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Opus 4.5 better than Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct?

Claude Opus 4.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.5 to 29.9 on the Noometry Index. Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct costs 2.4× 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 Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct?

Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct is cheaper. It lists at $2.80 per million input tokens and $8.40 per million output tokens; Claude Opus 4.5 lists at $5 and $25.

Which has the bigger context window?

Claude Opus 4.5 does, with 200K tokens against 131K.

How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 4.5 and Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct share?

3 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 4.5 has 69 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct has 6.

Related comparisons

Go deeper