Noometry

Model comparison

Claude Opus 5 vs Qwen1.5-110B

Claude Opus 5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 67.7 to 33.6 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 17 shared benchmarks.

Claude Opus 5 Anthropic

67.7

Rank #4 Confirmed

Qwen1.5-110B Alibaba (Qwen)

33.6

Rank #231 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 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 reasoning, where Claude Opus 5 leads 77.1 to 21.7.
  • Qwen1.5-110B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Claude Opus 5Qwen1.5-110B
ProviderAnthropicAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index67.733.6
Released2026-07-242024-04-25
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1M—
Max output128K—
Input $ / M tokens$5—
Output $ / M tokens$25—
Results tracked5720

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding Claude Opus 5 leads

Claude Opus 5: 67.0 (#5), Qwen1.5-110B: 32.4 (#260)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5Qwen1.5-110B
LMArena Coding15331184
DeepSWE73.6%—
FrontierCode53.4%—
CursorBench46.6%—
LMArena WebDev1694—
FrontierSWE52%—
SciCode56.4%—
WeirdML91.8%—
BigCodeBench Instruct—35%
BigCodeBench Complete—44.4%
ALE-Bench2,165—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Claude Opus 5: 55.5 (#1), Qwen1.5-110B: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5Qwen1.5-110B
APEX-Agents65.8%—
OSWorld 2.031.4%—
τ²-bench Banking48.7%—
PostTrainBench35%—
BALROG63.4%—
GBAEval79.6%—
GDP.pdf24%—
Vending-Bench 211,182—

Reasoning Claude Opus 5 leads

Claude Opus 5: 77.1 (#3), Qwen1.5-110B: 21.7 (#192)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5Qwen1.5-110B
LMArena Hard Prompts15251168
ARC-AGI-290.4%—
SimpleBench80.6%—
NYT Connections (extended)94.3%—
ARC-AGI-197.5%—
CritPt29.1%—
Chess Puzzles42%—
EBR-Bench45.7%—
Mystery Game Puzzles59%—
DTBench97.9%—
LMCA64.5%—
Bench to the Future 30.12—
Epoch Capabilities Index162.67—
ForecastBench—57.7

Math Claude Opus 5 leads

Claude Opus 5: 86.1 (#6), Qwen1.5-110B: 31.1 (#199)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5Qwen1.5-110B
LMArena Math15331185
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)85.6%—
FrontierMath Tier 473.2%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202598.9%—
ProofBench99%—

Knowledge Claude Opus 5 leads

Claude Opus 5: 66.8 (#8), Qwen1.5-110B: 30.7 (#217)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5Qwen1.5-110B
LMArena Expert15581144
GPQA Diamond93.9%—
SimpleQA Verified59.9%—

Multimodal Not comparable

Claude Opus 5: 51.1 (#6), Qwen1.5-110B: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5Qwen1.5-110B
LMArena Vision1321—
Blueprint-Bench 230.4%—
Furniture Assembly60.8%—
LMArena Document1516—

Multilingual Claude Opus 5 leads

Claude Opus 5: 58.8 (#3), Qwen1.5-110B: 33.8 (#245)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5Qwen1.5-110B
LMArena Non-English15001142
LMArena Chinese15751206
LMArena French15221150
LMArena German15221123
LMArena Japanese15101074
LMArena Korean15261044
LMArena Russian15071118
LMArena Spanish15191141

Instruction Following Claude Opus 5 leads

Claude Opus 5: 79.3 (#5), Qwen1.5-110B: 60.6 (#247)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5Qwen1.5-110B
LMArena Instruction Following15161158

Long Context Claude Opus 5 leads

Claude Opus 5: 46.5 (#20), Qwen1.5-110B: 35.0 (#237)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5Qwen1.5-110B
LMArena Longer Query15161157

Writing & Preference Claude Opus 5 leads

Claude Opus 5: 79.3 (#2), Qwen1.5-110B: 38.1 (#250)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5Qwen1.5-110B
LMArena Text15061175
LMArena Creative Writing14911148
LMArena Multi-Turn14961160
EQ-Bench Creative Writing2133—
EQ-Bench 41385—

Frequently asked questions

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

Claude Opus 5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 67.7 to 33.6 on the Noometry Index.

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

Claude Opus 5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 67.0 versus 32.4 in the Noometry coding category.

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

17 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 5 has 57 scored results on Noometry and Qwen1.5-110B has 20.

Related comparisons

Go deeper