Noometry

Model comparison

Claude Opus 4.7 vs Qwen3.5-4B

Claude Opus 4.7 has enough public results to be ranked (#17); Qwen3.5-4B does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.

Last verified . 1 shared benchmarks.

Claude Opus 4.7 Anthropic

58.4

Rank #17 Confirmed

Qwen3.5-4B Alibaba (Qwen)

36.2

Unranked Sparse

Summary

  • They share 1 benchmark with published results for both. Claude Opus 4.7 scores higher in 1 category and Qwen3.5-4B in 0 categories; one gap is clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where Claude Opus 4.7 leads 66.5 to 33.2.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 97.8% for Claude Opus 4.7 and 55.8% for Qwen3.5-4B.
  • Qwen3.5-4B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Claude Opus 4.7Qwen3.5-4B
ProviderAnthropicAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index58.436.2
Released2026-04-142026-02-24
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1M—
Max output128K—
Input $ / M tokens$5—
Output $ / M tokens$25—
Results tracked661

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

Category by category

Coding Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.7: 59.9 (#10), Qwen3.5-4B: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Qwen3.5-4B
SWE-bench Verified83.5%—
FrontierCode38.5%—
LMArena WebDev1557—
SciCode54.5%—
GSO44.1%—
WeirdML76.4%—
LMArena Coding1519—
MirrorCode31.1%—
ALE-Bench1,323—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.7: 47.9 (#8), Qwen3.5-4B: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Qwen3.5-4B
Terminal-Bench80.2%—
APEX-Agents49.2%—
OSWorld 2.018.2%—
τ²-bench Banking40.2%—
PostTrainBench28.6%—
ExploitBench26.5%—
GBAEval43.8%—
GDP.pdf21%—
LMArena Search1233—
Vending-Bench 210,937—

Reasoning Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.7: 53.7 (#24), Qwen3.5-4B: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Qwen3.5-4B
ARC-AGI-275.8%—
SimpleBench61.7%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark80.7%—
NYT Connections (extended)39%—
ARC-AGI-193.5%—
CritPt12%—
Chess Puzzles30%—
Thematic Generalization72.8%—
EBR-Bench19%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1507—
Mystery Game Puzzles28%—
DTBench94.7%—
LMCA52.2%—
Epoch Capabilities Index156.39—
ForecastBench60.3—

Math Claude Opus 4.7 leads

Claude Opus 4.7: 66.5 (#20), Qwen3.5-4B: 33.2

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Qwen3.5-4B
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202597.8%55.8%
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)70.2%—
FrontierMath Tier 431.7%—
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions73.6%—
ProofBench54%—
LMArena Math1499—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)43.8%—
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)22.9%—

Knowledge Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.7: 62.6 (#20), Qwen3.5-4B: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Qwen3.5-4B
GPQA Diamond90.2%—
Humanity's Last Exam36.2%—
SimpleQA Verified51.7%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate12%—
LMArena Expert1521—

Multimodal Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.7: 41.5 (#29), Qwen3.5-4B: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Qwen3.5-4B
LMArena Vision1317—
Blueprint-Bench 224.5%—
Furniture Assembly33.3%—
LMArena Document1495—

Multilingual Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.7: 57.5 (#9), Qwen3.5-4B: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Qwen3.5-4B
LMArena Non-English1481—
LMArena Chinese1530—
LMArena French1505—
LMArena German1494—
LMArena Japanese1472—
LMArena Korean1466—
LMArena Russian1494—
LMArena Spanish1497—

Instruction Following Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.7: 78.6 (#9), Qwen3.5-4B: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Qwen3.5-4B
LMArena Instruction Following1498—

Long Context Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.7: 46.1 (#24), Qwen3.5-4B: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Qwen3.5-4B
LMArena Longer Query1505—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.7: 75.3 (#8), Qwen3.5-4B: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Qwen3.5-4B
LMArena Text1491—
LMArena Creative Writing1486—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1914—
EQ-Bench 41311—
LMArena Multi-Turn1506—

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Opus 4.7 better than Qwen3.5-4B?

Claude Opus 4.7 has enough public results to be ranked (#17); Qwen3.5-4B does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.

How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 4.7 and Qwen3.5-4B share?

1 benchmark has published results for both models. Claude Opus 4.7 has 66 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.5-4B has 1.

Related comparisons

Go deeper