Noometry

Model comparison

Claude Opus 5.5 vs Qwen2.5 Plus 1127

Claude Opus 5.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 68.6 to 38.8 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 12 shared benchmarks.

Claude Opus 5.5 Anthropic

68.6

Rank #3 Confirmed

Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 Alibaba (Qwen)

38.8

Rank #181 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 5.5 scores higher in 8 categories and Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where Claude Opus 5.5 leads 91.8 to 36.1.

Side by side

Claude Opus 5.5Qwen2.5 Plus 1127
ProviderAnthropicAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index68.638.8
Released2026-09-22—
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
Context window1M—
Max output128K—
Input $ / M tokens$4—
Output $ / M tokens$20—
Results tracked4414

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), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 38.5 (#175)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen2.5 Plus 1127
LMArena Coding15471314
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), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen2.5 Plus 1127
APEX-Agents73.5%—
GDP.pdf30.6%—
Vending-Bench 29,235—

Reasoning Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 80.2 (#3), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 25.9 (#141)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen2.5 Plus 1127
LMArena Hard Prompts15351299
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), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 36.1 (#174)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen2.5 Plus 1127
LMArena Math15061298
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), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 35.5 (#183)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen2.5 Plus 1127
LMArena Expert15471289
GPQA Diamond90.6%—
SimpleQA Verified72.2%—

Multimodal Not comparable

Claude Opus 5.5: 57.8 (#1), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen2.5 Plus 1127
LMArena Vision1321—
Blueprint-Bench 251.2%—
Furniture Assembly83.3%—

Multilingual Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 59.1 (#2), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 41.9 (#201)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen2.5 Plus 1127
LMArena Non-English15071265
LMArena Chinese15881314
LMArena Russian15201271
LMArena French1514—
LMArena German—1231
LMArena Japanese—1207
LMArena Spanish1507—

Instruction Following Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 80.0 (#3), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 67.2 (#199)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen2.5 Plus 1127
LMArena Instruction Following15371275

Long Context Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 47.1 (#19), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 39.2 (#184)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen2.5 Plus 1127
LMArena Longer Query15321292

Writing & Preference Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 78.2 (#3), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 49.4 (#192)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen2.5 Plus 1127
LMArena Text15151299
LMArena Creative Writing15331262
LMArena Multi-Turn14991299
EQ-Bench Creative Writing2050—

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Opus 5.5 better than Qwen2.5 Plus 1127?

Claude Opus 5.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 68.6 to 38.8 on the Noometry Index.

Is Claude Opus 5.5 or Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 better for coding?

Claude Opus 5.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 71.9 versus 38.5 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 5.5 and Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 share?

12 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 5.5 has 44 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 has 14.

Related comparisons

Go deeper