# Claude 2.1 vs Qwen Max

> Qwen Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 34.7 to 25.2 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/claude-2-1-vs-qwen-max
- Last updated: 2026-10-12
- Shared benchmarks: 2

## Summary

- They share 2 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude 2.1 scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen Max in 4 categories; 4 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen Max leads 30.3 to 15.4.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is GPQA Diamond: 33% for Claude 2.1 and 56.1% for Qwen Max.

## Snapshot

| | Claude 2.1 | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 25.2 | 34.7 |
| Rank | 345 | 230 |
| Context | — | 33K |
| Input $/M | — | $1.60 |
| Output $/M | — | $6.40 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |

## Coding

- Claude 2.1: 26.2 (#327)
- Qwen Max: 30.7 (#292)

| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| Aider Polyglot | — | 21.8% |
| WeirdML | 7.1% | — |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1288 |

## Reasoning

- Claude 2.1: 21.4 (#221)
- Qwen Max: 25.1 (#151)

| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1269 |
| DTBench | 51% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 119.27 | — |
| ForecastBench | 54.2 | — |

## Math

- Claude 2.1: 10.2 (#315)
- Qwen Max: 22.3 (#276)

| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 1.9% | 16.1% |
| LMArena Math | — | 1275 |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 67.2% |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 1% |

## Knowledge

- Claude 2.1: 15.4 (#292)
- Qwen Max: 30.3 (#228)

| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 33% | 56.1% |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1248 |
| MMLU | 73.5% | — |

## Multilingual

- Claude 2.1: —
- Qwen Max: 41.8 (#202)

| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1263 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1254 |
| LMArena French | — | 1330 |
| LMArena German | — | 1254 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1205 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1142 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1274 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1290 |

## Instruction Following

- Claude 2.1: —
- Qwen Max: 66.5 (#208)

| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1262 |

## Long Context

- Claude 2.1: —
- Qwen Max: 39.4 (#180)

| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 66.7% |
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1288 |

## Writing & Preference

- Claude 2.1: —
- Qwen Max: 47.8 (#205)

| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1282 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1248 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1277 |

## FAQ

### Is Claude 2.1 better than Qwen Max?

Qwen Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 34.7 to 25.2 on the Noometry Index.

### Is Claude 2.1 or Qwen Max better for coding?

Qwen Max scores higher on coding benchmarks: 30.7 versus 26.2 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do Claude 2.1 and Qwen Max share?

2 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude 2.1 has 7 scored results on Noometry and Qwen Max has 23.