Noometry

Model comparison

Claude Opus 5 vs Qwen1.5-14B

Claude Opus 5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 67.7 to 32.1 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 16 shared benchmarks.

Claude Opus 5 Anthropic

67.7

Rank #4 Confirmed

Qwen1.5-14B Alibaba (Qwen)

32.1

Rank #250 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 16 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 5 scores higher in 8 categories and Qwen1.5-14B in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where Claude Opus 5 leads 77.1 to 20.5.
  • Qwen1.5-14B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Claude Opus 5Qwen1.5-14B
ProviderAnthropicAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index67.732.1
Released2026-07-242024-02-04
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1M—
Max output128K—
Input $ / M tokens$5—
Output $ / M tokens$25—
Results tracked5717

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), Qwen1.5-14B: 32.5 (#259)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5Qwen1.5-14B
LMArena Coding15331138
DeepSWE73.6%—
FrontierCode53.4%—
CursorBench46.6%—
LMArena WebDev1694—
FrontierSWE52%—
SciCode56.4%—
WeirdML91.8%—
ALE-Bench2,165—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Claude Opus 5: 55.5 (#1), Qwen1.5-14B: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5Qwen1.5-14B
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), Qwen1.5-14B: 20.5 (#217)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5Qwen1.5-14B
LMArena Hard Prompts15251113
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—

Math Claude Opus 5 leads

Claude Opus 5: 86.1 (#6), Qwen1.5-14B: 29.9 (#214)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5Qwen1.5-14B
LMArena Math15331125
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), Qwen1.5-14B: 29.3 (#230)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5Qwen1.5-14B
LMArena Expert15581094
GPQA Diamond93.9%—
SimpleQA Verified59.9%—
MMLU—68.6%

Multimodal Not comparable

Claude Opus 5: 51.1 (#6), Qwen1.5-14B: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5Qwen1.5-14B
LMArena Vision1321—
Blueprint-Bench 230.4%—
Furniture Assembly60.8%—
LMArena Document1516—

Multilingual Claude Opus 5 leads

Claude Opus 5: 58.8 (#3), Qwen1.5-14B: 30.8 (#257)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5Qwen1.5-14B
LMArena Non-English15001095
LMArena Chinese15751147
LMArena French15221115
LMArena German15221043
LMArena Japanese15101019
LMArena Russian15071046
LMArena Spanish15191085
LMArena Korean1526—

Instruction Following Claude Opus 5 leads

Claude Opus 5: 79.3 (#5), Qwen1.5-14B: 57.1 (#266)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5Qwen1.5-14B
LMArena Instruction Following15161102

Long Context Claude Opus 5 leads

Claude Opus 5: 46.5 (#20), Qwen1.5-14B: 33.7 (#252)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5Qwen1.5-14B
LMArena Longer Query15161113

Writing & Preference Claude Opus 5 leads

Claude Opus 5: 79.3 (#2), Qwen1.5-14B: 33.7 (#270)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5Qwen1.5-14B
LMArena Text15061128
LMArena Creative Writing14911091
LMArena Multi-Turn14961110
EQ-Bench Creative Writing2133—
EQ-Bench 41385—

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Opus 5 better than Qwen1.5-14B?

Claude Opus 5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 67.7 to 32.1 on the Noometry Index.

Is Claude Opus 5 or Qwen1.5-14B better for coding?

Claude Opus 5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 67.0 versus 32.5 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 5 and Qwen1.5-14B share?

16 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 5 has 57 scored results on Noometry and Qwen1.5-14B has 17.

Related comparisons

Go deeper