Model comparison

Claude Opus 5.5 vs Qwen3.7 Max

Claude Opus 5.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 68.5 to 51.4 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3.7 Max costs 2.1× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 5.5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified October 10, 2026. 25 shared benchmarks.

Claude Opus 5.5 Anthropic

68.5

Rank #3 Confirmed

Qwen3.7 Max

Alibaba (Qwen)

51.4

Rank #35 Confirmed

Summary

They share 25 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 5.5 scores higher in 9 categories and Qwen3.7 Max in 0 categories; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
The widest gap is in reasoning, where Claude Opus 5.5 leads 79.5 to 48.4.
The biggest single-benchmark swing is ProofBench: 100% for Claude Opus 5.5 and 26% for Qwen3.7 Max.
Qwen3.7 Max is cheaper at $2.50 / $7.50 per million input/output tokens, against $4 / $20 for Claude Opus 5.5.

Side by side

Claude Opus 5.5 and Qwen3.7 Max specifications
	Claude Opus 5.5	Qwen3.7 Max
Provider	Anthropic	Alibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index	68.5	51.4
Released	2026-09-22	2026-05-19
Weights	Proprietary	Proprietary
Context window	1M	1M
Max output	128K	131K
Input $ / M tokens	$4	$2.50
Output $ / M tokens	$20	$7.50
Results tracked	35	33

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), Qwen3.7 Max: 50.2 (#43)

Coding benchmarks
Benchmark	Claude Opus 5.5	Qwen3.7 Max
LMArena WebDev	1820	1515
SciCode	66.9%	48.8%
LMArena Coding	1545	1498
SWE-bench Verified	—	77.3%
FrontierCode	54.4%	—
CursorBench	57.8%	—
FrontierSWE	62.3%	—
MirrorCode	77.4%	—
ALE-Bench	—	1,189

Agentic & Tool Use Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 45.3 (#13), Qwen3.7 Max: 21.8 (#129)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
Benchmark	Claude Opus 5.5	Qwen3.7 Max
APEX-Agents	73.5%	—
GBAEval	—	0.4%
GDP.pdf	30.6%	—

Reasoning Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 79.5 (#2), Qwen3.7 Max: 48.4 (#36)

Reasoning benchmarks
Benchmark	Claude Opus 5.5	Qwen3.7 Max
NYT Connections (extended)	88.5%	85.1%
CritPt	31.7%	13.4%
EBR-Bench	71.4%	9.5%
LMArena Hard Prompts	1545	1483
Mystery Game Puzzles	71%	32%
DTBench	98.9%	92.3%
LMCA	68.2%	44%
ARC-AGI-2	92.5%	—
SimpleBench	—	70.4%
ARC-AGI-1	97.5%	—
Chess Puzzles	—	19%
Epoch Capabilities Index	—	153.74

Math Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 92.4 (#2), Qwen3.7 Max: 62.3 (#26)

Math benchmarks
Benchmark	Claude Opus 5.5	Qwen3.7 Max
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)	91.2%	64.6%
FrontierMath Tier 4	95%	34.1%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025	100%	95.6%
ProofBench	100%	26%
LMArena Math	—	1488

Knowledge Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 66.6 (#9), Qwen3.7 Max: 61.7 (#24)

Knowledge benchmarks
Benchmark	Claude Opus 5.5	Qwen3.7 Max
GPQA Diamond	90.6%	90.9%
SimpleQA Verified	72.2%	55.8%
LMArena Expert	1564	1488

Multimodal Not comparable

Claude Opus 5.5: 56.5 (#2), Qwen3.7 Max: —

Multimodal benchmarks
Benchmark	Claude Opus 5.5	Qwen3.7 Max
Furniture Assembly	83.3%	—

Multilingual Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 59.8 (#1), Qwen3.7 Max: 57.1 (#13)

Multilingual benchmarks
Benchmark	Claude Opus 5.5	Qwen3.7 Max
LMArena Non-English	1513	1475
LMArena Chinese	1572	1533
LMArena Russian	1532	1482

Instruction Following Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 80.1 (#2), Qwen3.7 Max: 76.9 (#34)

Instruction Following benchmarks
Benchmark	Claude Opus 5.5	Qwen3.7 Max
LMArena Instruction Following	1535	1460

Long Context Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 47.3 (#18), Qwen3.7 Max: 45.4 (#34)

Long Context benchmarks
Benchmark	Claude Opus 5.5	Qwen3.7 Max
LMArena Longer Query	1540	1484

Writing & Preference Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 78.7 (#3), Qwen3.7 Max: 65.2 (#52)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
Benchmark	Claude Opus 5.5	Qwen3.7 Max
LMArena Text	1518	1476
LMArena Creative Writing	1538	1450
LMArena Multi-Turn	1520	1482
EQ-Bench Creative Writing	2050	—
EQ-Bench 4	—	1110

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Opus 5.5 better than Qwen3.7 Max?

Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 5.5 or Qwen3.7 Max?

Qwen3.7 Max is cheaper. It lists at $2.50 per million input tokens and $7.50 per million output tokens; Claude Opus 5.5 lists at $4 and $20.

Is Claude Opus 5.5 or Qwen3.7 Max better for coding?

Claude Opus 5.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 71.4 versus 50.2 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Both accept 1M tokens.

How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 5.5 and Qwen3.7 Max share?

25 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 5.5 has 35 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.7 Max has 33.