Noometry

Model comparison

Claude Opus 5.5 vs Qwen1.5-72B

Claude Opus 5.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 68.5 to 30.3 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 12 shared benchmarks.

Claude Opus 5.5 Anthropic

68.5

Rank #3 Confirmed

Qwen1.5-72B Alibaba (Qwen)

30.3

Rank #282 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 5.5 scores higher in 8 categories and Qwen1.5-72B 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 30.7.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is GPQA Diamond: 90.6% for Claude Opus 5.5 and 28.8% for Qwen1.5-72B.
  • Qwen1.5-72B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Claude Opus 5.5Qwen1.5-72B
ProviderAnthropicAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index68.530.3
Released2026-09-222024-02-04
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1M—
Max output128K—
Input $ / M tokens$4—
Output $ / M tokens$20—
Results tracked3522

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), Qwen1.5-72B: 31.4 (#272)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen1.5-72B
LMArena Coding15451166
FrontierCode54.4%—
CursorBench57.8%—
LMArena WebDev1820—
FrontierSWE62.3%—
SciCode66.9%—
BigCodeBench Instruct—33.2%
MirrorCode77.4%—
BigCodeBench Complete—40.3%
HumanEval+—59.1%
MBPP+—61.6%

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Claude Opus 5.5: 45.3 (#13), Qwen1.5-72B: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen1.5-72B
APEX-Agents73.5%—
GDP.pdf30.6%—

Reasoning Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 79.5 (#2), Qwen1.5-72B: 21.2 (#201)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen1.5-72B
LMArena Hard Prompts15451148
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%—

Math Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 92.4 (#2), Qwen1.5-72B: 30.7 (#205)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen1.5-72B
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)91.2%—
FrontierMath Tier 495%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025100%—
ProofBench100%—
LMArena Math—1164

Knowledge Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 66.6 (#9), Qwen1.5-72B: 11.5 (#295)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen1.5-72B
GPQA Diamond90.6%28.8%
LMArena Expert15641136
SimpleQA Verified72.2%—

Multimodal Not comparable

Claude Opus 5.5: 56.5 (#2), Qwen1.5-72B: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen1.5-72B
Furniture Assembly83.3%—

Multilingual Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 59.8 (#1), Qwen1.5-72B: 33.4 (#248)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen1.5-72B
LMArena Non-English15131135
LMArena Chinese15721186
LMArena Russian15321104
LMArena French—1158
LMArena German—1084
LMArena Japanese—1061
LMArena Korean—1049
LMArena Spanish—1110

Instruction Following Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 80.1 (#2), Qwen1.5-72B: 59.6 (#251)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen1.5-72B
LMArena Instruction Following15351142

Long Context Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 47.3 (#18), Qwen1.5-72B: 35.0 (#238)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen1.5-72B
LMArena Longer Query15401157

Writing & Preference Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 78.7 (#3), Qwen1.5-72B: 37.4 (#253)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen1.5-72B
LMArena Text15181166
LMArena Creative Writing15381137
LMArena Multi-Turn15201160
EQ-Bench Creative Writing2050—

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Opus 5.5 better than Qwen1.5-72B?

Claude Opus 5.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 68.5 to 30.3 on the Noometry Index.

Is Claude Opus 5.5 or Qwen1.5-72B better for coding?

Claude Opus 5.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 71.4 versus 31.4 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 5.5 and Qwen1.5-72B share?

12 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 5.5 has 35 scored results on Noometry and Qwen1.5-72B has 22.

Related comparisons

Go deeper