Model comparison
Claude Opus 4 vs Llama 2-13B
Claude Opus 4 is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.1 to 29.6 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 19 shared benchmarks.
MetaSummary
- They share 19 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 4 scores higher in 8 categories and Llama 2-13B in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Claude Opus 4 leads 61.2 to 29.8.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is DTBench: 81.6% for Claude Opus 4 and 42.2% for Llama 2-13B.
- Llama 2-13B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Claude Opus 4 | Llama 2-13B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | Meta |
| Noometry Index | 43.1 | 29.6 |
| Released | 2025-05-22 | 2023-07-18 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 200K | — |
| Max output | 32K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $15 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $75 | — |
| Results tracked | 56 | 32 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Claude Opus 4 leads
Claude Opus 4: 47.2 (#62), Llama 2-13B: 30.9 (#291)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4 | Llama 2-13B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1442 | 1062 |
| SWE-bench Verified | 70.7% | — |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 67.6% | — |
| Aider Polyglot | 72% | — |
| GSO | 6.9% | — |
| WeirdML | 43.7% | — |
| AlgoTune | 1.33 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Claude Opus 4: 34.8 (#42), Llama 2-13B: —
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4 | Llama 2-13B |
|---|---|---|
| Cybench | 38% | — |
| DeepResearch Bench | 46.8% | — |
| LMArena Search | 1127 | — |
| METR Time Horizons | 63.9% | — |
Reasoning Claude Opus 4 leads
Claude Opus 4: 27.3 (#121), Llama 2-13B: 12.8 (#337)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4 | Llama 2-13B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1399 | 1051 |
| DTBench | 81.6% | 42.2% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 142.67 | 106.17 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 8.6% | — |
| SimpleBench | 58.8% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 74.3% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 35.7% | — |
| CritPt | 0.3% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 0% |
| EnigmaEval | 5.6% | — |
| LMCA | 37.4% | — |
| BIG-Bench Hard | — | 58.2% |
| ForecastBench | 61.1 | — |
| HellaSwag | — | 80.7% |
| LAMBADA | — | 76.5% |
| PIQA | — | 80.8% |
| WinoGrande | — | 72.8% |
Math Claude Opus 4 leads
Claude Opus 4: 42.0 (#86), Llama 2-13B: 31.1 (#229)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4 | Llama 2-13B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1390 | 1065 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 64.4% | — |
| Omni-MATH | 61.6% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 85% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 4.5% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 4.2% | — |
| GSM8K | — | 36.9% |
Knowledge Claude Opus 4 leads
Claude Opus 4: 44.0 (#88), Llama 2-13B: 28.1 (#249)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4 | Llama 2-13B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1386 | 1030 |
| GPQA Diamond | 76.3% | — |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 10.7% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | 87.5% | — |
| Confabulations | 15.9% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 12% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 70.8% | — |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | — | 60.3% |
| BoolQ | — | 82.4% |
| MMLU | — | 55.6% |
| OpenBookQA | — | 57% |
| TriviaQA | — | 79.6% |
Multimodal Not comparable
Claude Opus 4: 31.5 (#106), Llama 2-13B: —
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4 | Llama 2-13B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1192 | — |
| GeoBench | 49% | — |
| VPCT | 38% | — |
| ScienceQA | — | 55.8% |
Multilingual Claude Opus 4 leads
Claude Opus 4: 48.8 (#138), Llama 2-13B: 26.5 (#279)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4 | Llama 2-13B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1362 | 1024 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1386 | 1001 |
| LMArena French | 1372 | 1044 |
| LMArena German | 1391 | 1009 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1331 | 894 |
| LMArena Korean | 1321 | 953 |
| LMArena Russian | 1392 | 1055 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1389 | 1087 |
Instruction Following Claude Opus 4 leads
Claude Opus 4: 77.1 (#28), Llama 2-13B: 53.3 (#287)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4 | Llama 2-13B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1406 | 1045 |
| IFEval | 91.8% | — |
Long Context Claude Opus 4 leads
Claude Opus 4: 39.6 (#172), Llama 2-13B: 32.3 (#269)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4 | Llama 2-13B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1422 | 1064 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | 61.1% | — |
Writing & Preference Claude Opus 4 leads
Claude Opus 4: 61.2 (#89), Llama 2-13B: 29.8 (#289)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4 | Llama 2-13B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1377 | 1084 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1387 | 1047 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1396 | 1050 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 83.6% | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1580 | — |
| WildBench | 85.2% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Claude Opus 4 better than Llama 2-13B?
Claude Opus 4 is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.1 to 29.6 on the Noometry Index.
Is Claude Opus 4 or Llama 2-13B better for coding?
Claude Opus 4 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 47.2 versus 30.9 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 4 and Llama 2-13B share?
19 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 4 has 56 scored results on Noometry and Llama 2-13B has 32.