Noometry

Model comparison

Claude Opus 5.5 vs Qwen1.5 4b Chat

Claude Opus 5.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 68.6 to 28.8 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 12 shared benchmarks.

Claude Opus 5.5 Anthropic

68.6

Rank #3 Confirmed

Qwen1.5 4b Chat Alibaba (Qwen)

28.8

Rank #322 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 5.5 scores higher in 8 categories and Qwen1.5 4b Chat in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where Claude Opus 5.5 leads 80.2 to 18.5.
  • Qwen1.5 4b Chat has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Claude Opus 5.5Qwen1.5 4b Chat
ProviderAnthropicAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index68.628.8
Released2026-09-22—
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1M—
Max output128K—
Input $ / M tokens$4—
Output $ / M tokens$20—
Results tracked4413

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), Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 29.1 (#308)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen1.5 4b Chat
LMArena Coding1547999
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), Qwen1.5 4b Chat: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen1.5 4b Chat
APEX-Agents73.5%—
GDP.pdf30.6%—
Vending-Bench 29,235—

Reasoning Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 80.2 (#3), Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 18.5 (#279)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen1.5 4b Chat
LMArena Hard Prompts1535976
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%—
Epoch Capabilities Index167.33—

Math Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 91.8 (#3), Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 30.4 (#234)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen1.5 4b Chat
LMArena Math15061026
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)91.2%—
FrontierMath Tier 495%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025100%—
ProofBench100%—
FrontierMath Erdős2.9%—

Knowledge Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 66.4 (#10), Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 26.7 (#255)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen1.5 4b Chat
LMArena Expert1547980
GPQA Diamond90.6%—
SimpleQA Verified72.2%—

Multimodal Not comparable

Claude Opus 5.5: 57.8 (#1), Qwen1.5 4b Chat: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen1.5 4b Chat
LMArena Vision1321—
Blueprint-Bench 251.2%—
Furniture Assembly83.3%—

Multilingual Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 59.1 (#2), Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 24.1 (#290)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen1.5 4b Chat
LMArena Non-English1507979
LMArena Chinese15881024
LMArena Russian1520952
LMArena French1514—
LMArena German—902
LMArena Spanish1507—

Instruction Following Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 80.0 (#3), Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 49.0 (#300)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen1.5 4b Chat
LMArena Instruction Following1537978

Long Context Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 47.1 (#19), Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 30.1 (#290)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen1.5 4b Chat
LMArena Longer Query1532988

Writing & Preference Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 78.2 (#3), Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 23.8 (#309)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen1.5 4b Chat
LMArena Text1515997
LMArena Creative Writing1533969
LMArena Multi-Turn1499977
EQ-Bench Creative Writing2050—

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Opus 5.5 better than Qwen1.5 4b Chat?

Claude Opus 5.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 68.6 to 28.8 on the Noometry Index.

Is Claude Opus 5.5 or Qwen1.5 4b Chat better for coding?

Claude Opus 5.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 71.9 versus 29.1 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 5.5 and Qwen1.5 4b Chat share?

12 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 5.5 has 44 scored results on Noometry and Qwen1.5 4b Chat has 13.

Related comparisons

Go deeper