Noometry

Model comparison

Claude Opus 5 vs Qwen3-1.7B

Claude Opus 5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 67.8 to 26.6 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 3 shared benchmarks.

Claude Opus 5 Anthropic

67.8

Rank #4 Confirmed

Qwen3-1.7B Alibaba (Qwen)

26.6

Rank #336 Reported

Summary

  • They share 3 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 5 scores higher in 4 categories and Qwen3-1.7B in 0 categories; 4 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where Claude Opus 5 leads 86.2 to 16.3.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 98.9% for Claude Opus 5 and 8.1% for Qwen3-1.7B.
  • Qwen3-1.7B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Claude Opus 5Qwen3-1.7B
ProviderAnthropicAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index67.826.6
Released2026-07-242025-04-29
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1M—
Max output128K—
Input $ / M tokens$5—
Output $ / M tokens$25—
Results tracked574

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

Category by category

Coding Not comparable

Claude Opus 5: 67.5 (#5), Qwen3-1.7B: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5Qwen3-1.7B
DeepSWE73.6%—
FrontierCode53.4%—
CursorBench46.6%—
LMArena WebDev1691—
FrontierSWE52%—
SciCode56.4%—
WeirdML91.8%—
LMArena Coding1534—
ALE-Bench2,165—

Agentic & Tool Use Claude Opus 5 leads

Claude Opus 5: 55.6 (#1), Qwen3-1.7B: 24.7 (#115)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5Qwen3-1.7B
APEX-Agents65.8%—
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard—28.4%
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), Qwen3-1.7B: 19.2 (#267)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5Qwen3-1.7B
Chess Puzzles42%0%
ARC-AGI-290.4%—
SimpleBench80.6%—
NYT Connections (extended)94.3%—
ARC-AGI-197.5%—
CritPt29.1%—
EBR-Bench45.7%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1526—
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), Qwen3-1.7B: 16.3 (#294)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5Qwen3-1.7B
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202598.9%8.1%
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)85.6%—
FrontierMath Tier 473.2%—
ProofBench99%—
LMArena Math1531—

Knowledge Claude Opus 5 leads

Claude Opus 5: 66.8 (#9), Qwen3-1.7B: 19.6 (#278)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5Qwen3-1.7B
GPQA Diamond93.9%38%
SimpleQA Verified59.9%—
LMArena Expert1557—

Multimodal Not comparable

Claude Opus 5: 50.8 (#8), Qwen3-1.7B: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5Qwen3-1.7B
LMArena Vision1319—
Blueprint-Bench 230.4%—
Furniture Assembly60.8%—
LMArena Document1516—

Multilingual Not comparable

Claude Opus 5: 58.8 (#4), Qwen3-1.7B: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5Qwen3-1.7B
LMArena Non-English1501—
LMArena Chinese1574—
LMArena French1519—
LMArena German1524—
LMArena Japanese1516—
LMArena Korean1521—
LMArena Russian1507—
LMArena Spanish1519—

Instruction Following Not comparable

Claude Opus 5: 79.2 (#7), Qwen3-1.7B: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5Qwen3-1.7B
LMArena Instruction Following1517—

Long Context Not comparable

Claude Opus 5: 46.5 (#21), Qwen3-1.7B: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5Qwen3-1.7B
LMArena Longer Query1515—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Claude Opus 5: 79.2 (#1), Qwen3-1.7B: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5Qwen3-1.7B
LMArena Text1507—
LMArena Creative Writing1491—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing2133—
EQ-Bench 41385—
LMArena Multi-Turn1499—

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Opus 5 better than Qwen3-1.7B?

Claude Opus 5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 67.8 to 26.6 on the Noometry Index.

How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 5 and Qwen3-1.7B share?

3 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 5 has 57 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3-1.7B has 4.

Related comparisons

Go deeper