Noometry

Model comparison

Claude Opus 5.5 vs Qwen1.5-110B

Claude Opus 5.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 68.5 to 33.6 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 11 shared benchmarks.

Claude Opus 5.5 Anthropic

68.5

Rank #3 Confirmed

Qwen1.5-110B Alibaba (Qwen)

33.6

Rank #231 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 11 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 5.5 scores higher in 8 categories and Qwen1.5-110B in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where Claude Opus 5.5 leads 92.4 to 31.1.
  • Qwen1.5-110B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Claude Opus 5.5Qwen1.5-110B
ProviderAnthropicAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index68.533.6
Released2026-09-222024-04-25
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1M—
Max output128K—
Input $ / M tokens$4—
Output $ / M tokens$20—
Results tracked3520

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: 71.4 (#1), Qwen1.5-110B: 32.4 (#260)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen1.5-110B
LMArena Coding15451184
FrontierCode54.4%—
CursorBench57.8%—
LMArena WebDev1820—
FrontierSWE62.3%—
SciCode66.9%—
BigCodeBench Instruct—35%
MirrorCode77.4%—
BigCodeBench Complete—44.4%

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Claude Opus 5.5: 45.3 (#13), Qwen1.5-110B: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen1.5-110B
APEX-Agents73.5%—
GDP.pdf30.6%—

Reasoning Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 79.5 (#2), Qwen1.5-110B: 21.7 (#192)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen1.5-110B
LMArena Hard Prompts15451168
ARC-AGI-292.5%—
NYT Connections (extended)88.5%—
ARC-AGI-197.5%—
CritPt31.7%—
EBR-Bench71.4%—
Mystery Game Puzzles71%—
DTBench98.9%—
LMCA68.2%—
ForecastBench—57.7

Math Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 92.4 (#2), Qwen1.5-110B: 31.1 (#199)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen1.5-110B
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)91.2%—
FrontierMath Tier 495%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025100%—
ProofBench100%—
LMArena Math—1185

Knowledge Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 66.6 (#9), Qwen1.5-110B: 30.7 (#217)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen1.5-110B
LMArena Expert15641144
GPQA Diamond90.6%—
SimpleQA Verified72.2%—

Multimodal Not comparable

Claude Opus 5.5: 56.5 (#2), Qwen1.5-110B: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen1.5-110B
Furniture Assembly83.3%—

Multilingual Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 59.8 (#1), Qwen1.5-110B: 33.8 (#245)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen1.5-110B
LMArena Non-English15131142
LMArena Chinese15721206
LMArena Russian15321118
LMArena French—1150
LMArena German—1123
LMArena Japanese—1074
LMArena Korean—1044
LMArena Spanish—1141

Instruction Following Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 80.1 (#2), Qwen1.5-110B: 60.6 (#247)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen1.5-110B
LMArena Instruction Following15351158

Long Context Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 47.3 (#18), Qwen1.5-110B: 35.0 (#237)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen1.5-110B
LMArena Longer Query15401157

Writing & Preference Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 78.7 (#3), Qwen1.5-110B: 38.1 (#250)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen1.5-110B
LMArena Text15181175
LMArena Creative Writing15381148
LMArena Multi-Turn15201160
EQ-Bench Creative Writing2050—

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Opus 5.5 better than Qwen1.5-110B?

Claude Opus 5.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 68.5 to 33.6 on the Noometry Index.

Is Claude Opus 5.5 or Qwen1.5-110B better for coding?

Claude Opus 5.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 71.4 versus 32.4 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 5.5 and Qwen1.5-110B share?

11 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 5.5 has 35 scored results on Noometry and Qwen1.5-110B has 20.

Related comparisons

Go deeper