Noometry

Model comparison

Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs Qwen2.5 7B Instruct

Claude Sonnet 4.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 44.1 to 29.0 on the Noometry Index. Qwen2.5 7B Instruct costs 20× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Sonnet 4.5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 11 shared benchmarks.

Claude Sonnet 4.5 Anthropic

44.1

Rank #81 Confirmed

Qwen2.5 7B Instruct Alibaba (Qwen)

29.0

Rank #320 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 11 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Sonnet 4.5 scores higher in 7 categories and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct in 0 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where Claude Sonnet 4.5 leads 48.4 to 17.0.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 77.8% for Claude Sonnet 4.5 and 2.5% for Qwen2.5 7B Instruct.
  • Qwen2.5 7B Instruct is cheaper at $0.17 / $0.70 per million input/output tokens, against $3 / $15 for Claude Sonnet 4.5.
  • Claude Sonnet 4.5 accepts more context: 200K tokens versus 131K.
  • Qwen2.5 7B Instruct has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Claude Sonnet 4.5Qwen2.5 7B Instruct
ProviderAnthropicAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index44.129.0
Released2025-09-292024-09
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window200K131K
Max output64K8K
Input $ / M tokens$3$0.17
Output $ / M tokens$15$0.70
Results tracked7315

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

Category by category

Coding Claude Sonnet 4.5 leads

Claude Sonnet 4.5: 47.3 (#61), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 36.5 (#208)

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.5Qwen2.5 7B Instruct
SWE-bench Verified71.3%—
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)71.4%—
LMArena WebDev1393—
SWE-bench Multilingual67%—
SciCode44.7%—
GSO14.7%—
WeirdML47.7%—
BigCodeBench Instruct—37.6%
LMArena Coding1489—
BigCodeBench Complete—46.1%
ALE-Bench796.15—
AlgoTune1.52—

Agentic & Tool Use Claude Sonnet 4.5 leads

Claude Sonnet 4.5: 38.3 (#32), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 23.8 (#124)

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.5Qwen2.5 7B Instruct
Terminal-Bench46.5%—
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard73.2%—
GDPval42.5%—
Remote Labor Index2.1%—
τ²-bench Airline72%—
τ²-bench Banking25.3%—
τ²-bench Retail72.4%—
τ²-bench Telecom84.9%—
Cybench60%—
DeepResearch Bench52.6%—
OSWorld62.9%—
BALROG—7.8%
LMArena Search1159—
METR Time Horizons67.4%—
Vending-Bench 23,839—

Reasoning Claude Sonnet 4.5 leads

Claude Sonnet 4.5: 26.9 (#125), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 14.8 (#322)

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.5Qwen2.5 7B Instruct
Chess Puzzles12%0%
DTBench83.2%47.7%
LMCA38.8%6.4%
Epoch Capabilities Index146.84118.51
ARC-AGI-213.6%—
SimpleBench54.3%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark57.9%—
NYT Connections (extended)37.3%—
ARC-AGI-163.7%—
CritPt1.1%—
EnigmaEval6%—
EBR-Bench2.4%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1462—
Mystery Game Puzzles17%—
ForecastBench61.9—

Math Claude Sonnet 4.5 leads

Claude Sonnet 4.5: 32.3 (#216), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 12.6 (#306)

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.5Qwen2.5 7B Instruct
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202577.8%2.5%
Omni-MATH55.3%29.4%
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)23.9%—
FrontierMath Tier 42.4%—
ProofBench19%—
LMArena Math1449—
MATH Level 597.7%—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)15.2%—
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)4.2%—

Knowledge Claude Sonnet 4.5 leads

Claude Sonnet 4.5: 48.4 (#76), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 17.0 (#286)

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.5Qwen2.5 7B Instruct
GPQA Diamond82.3%35.5%
MMLU-Pro86.9%53.9%
GPQA (HELM)68.6%34.1%
Humanity's Last Exam13.7%—
SimpleQA Verified30.7%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate12%—
LMArena Expert1482—
MMLU—72.9%

Multimodal Not comparable

Claude Sonnet 4.5: 34.8 (#89), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: —

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.5Qwen2.5 7B Instruct
VPCT39.8%—
LMArena Document1450—

Multilingual Not comparable

Claude Sonnet 4.5: 53.4 (#69), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: —

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.5Qwen2.5 7B Instruct
LMArena Non-English1425—
LMArena Chinese1459—
LMArena French1458—
LMArena German1427—
LMArena Japanese1390—
LMArena Korean1403—
LMArena Russian1437—
LMArena Spanish1457—

Instruction Following Claude Sonnet 4.5 leads

Claude Sonnet 4.5: 75.0 (#78), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 63.2 (#231)

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.5Qwen2.5 7B Instruct
IFEval85%74.1%
LMArena Instruction Following1459—

Long Context Not comparable

Claude Sonnet 4.5: 45.2 (#46), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: —

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.5Qwen2.5 7B Instruct
LMArena Longer Query1476—

Writing & Preference Claude Sonnet 4.5 leads

Claude Sonnet 4.5: 66.5 (#34), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 48.8 (#195)

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.5Qwen2.5 7B Instruct
WildBench85.4%73.1%
LMArena Text1439—
LMArena Creative Writing1442—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1678—
LMArena Multi-Turn1465—

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Sonnet 4.5 better than Qwen2.5 7B Instruct?

Claude Sonnet 4.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 44.1 to 29.0 on the Noometry Index. Qwen2.5 7B Instruct costs 20× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Sonnet 4.5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, Claude Sonnet 4.5 or Qwen2.5 7B Instruct?

Qwen2.5 7B Instruct is cheaper. It lists at $0.17 per million input tokens and $0.70 per million output tokens; Claude Sonnet 4.5 lists at $3 and $15.

Is Claude Sonnet 4.5 or Qwen2.5 7B Instruct better for coding?

Claude Sonnet 4.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 47.3 versus 36.5 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Claude Sonnet 4.5 does, with 200K tokens against 131K.

How many benchmarks do Claude Sonnet 4.5 and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct share?

11 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Sonnet 4.5 has 73 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct has 15.

Related comparisons

Go deeper