Noometry

Model comparison

Claude Opus 5.5 vs Qwen-14B

Claude Opus 5.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 68.6 to 31.4 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 11 shared benchmarks.

Claude Opus 5.5 Anthropic

68.6

Rank #3 Confirmed

Qwen-14B Alibaba (Qwen)

31.4

Rank #275 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 11 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 5.5 scores higher in 7 categories and Qwen-14B in 0 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where Claude Opus 5.5 leads 80.2 to 19.6.
  • Qwen-14B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Claude Opus 5.5Qwen-14B
ProviderAnthropicAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index68.631.4
Released2026-09-222023-09-24
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1M—
Max output128K—
Input $ / M tokens$4—
Output $ / M tokens$20—
Results tracked4418

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

Category by category

Coding Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 71.9 (#3), Qwen-14B: 31.2 (#288)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen-14B
LMArena Coding15471071
FrontierCode54.6%—
CursorBench57.8%—
LMArena WebDev1813—
FrontierSWE62.3%—
SciCode66.9%—
MirrorCode77.4%—
ALE-Bench2,147—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Claude Opus 5.5: 45.3 (#15), Qwen-14B: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen-14B
APEX-Agents73.5%—
GDP.pdf30.6%—
Vending-Bench 29,235—

Reasoning Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 80.2 (#3), Qwen-14B: 19.6 (#257)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen-14B
LMArena Hard Prompts15351027
Epoch Capabilities Index167.33113.03
ARC-AGI-293.3%—
NYT Connections (extended)88.5%—
ARC-AGI-198.5%—
CritPt31.7%—
EBR-Bench71.4%—
Mystery Game Puzzles71%—
DTBench98.9%—
LMCA68.2%—
BIG-Bench Hard—55%
LAMBADA—71.1%
PIQA—79.9%

Math Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 91.8 (#3), Qwen-14B: 31.2 (#227)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen-14B
LMArena Math15061068
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)91.2%—
FrontierMath Tier 495%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025100%—
ProofBench100%—
FrontierMath Erdős2.9%—
GSM8K—61.3%

Knowledge Not comparable

Claude Opus 5.5: 66.4 (#10), Qwen-14B: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen-14B
GPQA Diamond90.6%—
SimpleQA Verified72.2%—
LMArena Expert1547—
ARC (AI2) Challenge—84.4%
BoolQ—86.2%
MMLU—66.3%

Multimodal Not comparable

Claude Opus 5.5: 57.8 (#1), Qwen-14B: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen-14B
LMArena Vision1321—
Blueprint-Bench 251.2%—
Furniture Assembly83.3%—

Multilingual Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 59.1 (#2), Qwen-14B: 27.5 (#275)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen-14B
LMArena Non-English15071041
LMArena Chinese15881077
LMArena French1514—
LMArena Russian1520—
LMArena Spanish1507—

Instruction Following Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 80.0 (#3), Qwen-14B: 52.4 (#289)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen-14B
LMArena Instruction Following15371031

Long Context Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 47.1 (#19), Qwen-14B: 31.3 (#280)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen-14B
LMArena Longer Query15321028

Writing & Preference Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 78.2 (#3), Qwen-14B: 27.6 (#299)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen-14B
LMArena Text15151051
LMArena Creative Writing15331028
LMArena Multi-Turn14991022
EQ-Bench Creative Writing2050—

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Opus 5.5 better than Qwen-14B?

Claude Opus 5.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 68.6 to 31.4 on the Noometry Index.

Is Claude Opus 5.5 or Qwen-14B better for coding?

Claude Opus 5.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 71.9 versus 31.2 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 5.5 and Qwen-14B share?

11 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 5.5 has 44 scored results on Noometry and Qwen-14B has 18.

Related comparisons

Go deeper