Noometry

Model comparison

Claude Opus 5 vs Qwen1.5-7B

Claude Opus 5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 67.8 to 31.4 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 12 shared benchmarks.

Claude Opus 5 Anthropic

67.8

Rank #4 Confirmed

Qwen1.5-7B Alibaba (Qwen)

31.4

Rank #273 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 5 scores higher in 8 categories and Qwen1.5-7B in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where Claude Opus 5 leads 77.2 to 20.4.
  • Qwen1.5-7B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Claude Opus 5Qwen1.5-7B
ProviderAnthropicAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index67.831.4
Released2026-07-242024-02-04
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1M—
Max output128K—
Input $ / M tokens$5—
Output $ / M tokens$25—
Results tracked5713

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

Category by category

Coding Claude Opus 5 leads

Claude Opus 5: 67.5 (#5), Qwen1.5-7B: 32.2 (#276)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5Qwen1.5-7B
LMArena Coding15341107
DeepSWE73.6%—
FrontierCode53.4%—
CursorBench46.6%—
LMArena WebDev1691—
FrontierSWE52%—
SciCode56.4%—
WeirdML91.8%—
ALE-Bench2,165—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Claude Opus 5: 55.6 (#1), Qwen1.5-7B: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5Qwen1.5-7B
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: 77.2 (#4), Qwen1.5-7B: 20.4 (#240)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5Qwen1.5-7B
LMArena Hard Prompts15261065
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 Index162.78—

Math Claude Opus 5 leads

Claude Opus 5: 86.2 (#8), Qwen1.5-7B: 31.4 (#224)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5Qwen1.5-7B
LMArena Math15311080
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 (#9), Qwen1.5-7B: 28.7 (#243)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5Qwen1.5-7B
LMArena Expert15571055
GPQA Diamond93.9%—
SimpleQA Verified59.9%—
MMLU—62.6%

Multimodal Not comparable

Claude Opus 5: 50.8 (#8), Qwen1.5-7B: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5Qwen1.5-7B
LMArena Vision1319—
Blueprint-Bench 230.4%—
Furniture Assembly60.8%—
LMArena Document1516—

Multilingual Claude Opus 5 leads

Claude Opus 5: 58.8 (#4), Qwen1.5-7B: 28.5 (#271)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5Qwen1.5-7B
LMArena Non-English15011058
LMArena Chinese15741141
LMArena Russian15071006
LMArena French1519—
LMArena German1524—
LMArena Japanese1516—
LMArena Korean1521—
LMArena Spanish1519—

Instruction Following Claude Opus 5 leads

Claude Opus 5: 79.2 (#7), Qwen1.5-7B: 54.1 (#281)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5Qwen1.5-7B
LMArena Instruction Following15171058

Long Context Claude Opus 5 leads

Claude Opus 5: 46.5 (#21), Qwen1.5-7B: 33.1 (#266)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5Qwen1.5-7B
LMArena Longer Query15151090

Writing & Preference Claude Opus 5 leads

Claude Opus 5: 79.2 (#1), Qwen1.5-7B: 29.6 (#293)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5Qwen1.5-7B
LMArena Text15071083
LMArena Creative Writing14911035
LMArena Multi-Turn14991062
EQ-Bench Creative Writing2133—
EQ-Bench 41385—

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Opus 5 better than Qwen1.5-7B?

Claude Opus 5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 67.8 to 31.4 on the Noometry Index.

Is Claude Opus 5 or Qwen1.5-7B better for coding?

Claude Opus 5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 67.5 versus 32.2 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 5 and Qwen1.5-7B share?

12 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 5 has 57 scored results on Noometry and Qwen1.5-7B has 13.

Related comparisons

Go deeper