# Claude 2.1 vs Qwen3.8 Max

> Qwen3.8 Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 56.8 to 25.2 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/claude-2-1-vs-qwen3-8-max
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 4

## Summary

- They share 4 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude 2.1 scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3.8 Max in 4 categories; 4 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Qwen3.8 Max leads 73.2 to 10.2.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 1.9% for Claude 2.1 and 100% for Qwen3.8 Max.

## Snapshot

| | Claude 2.1 | Qwen3.8 Max |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 25.2 | 56.8 |
| Rank | 345 | 22 |
| Context | — | 1M |
| Input $/M | — | $2 |
| Output $/M | — | $6 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |

## Coding

- Claude 2.1: 26.2 (#327)
- Qwen3.8 Max: 53.5 (#29)

| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | Qwen3.8 Max |
|---|---|---|
| DeepSWE | — | 57.5% |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1674 |
| FrontierSWE | — | 17.8% |
| SciCode | — | 53.2% |
| WeirdML | 7.1% | — |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1502 |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Claude 2.1: —
- Qwen3.8 Max: 45.4 (#14)

| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | Qwen3.8 Max |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | — | 63.3% |
| τ²-bench Banking | — | 55.1% |
| GDP.pdf | — | 23.2% |

## Reasoning

- Claude 2.1: 21.4 (#221)
- Qwen3.8 Max: 54.4 (#26)

| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | Qwen3.8 Max |
|---|---|---|
| DTBench | 51% | 92% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 119.27 | 156.41 |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 88.3% |
| CritPt | — | 20% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 40% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1496 |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 38% |
| LMCA | — | 46.2% |
| ForecastBench | 54.2 | — |

## Math

- Claude 2.1: 10.2 (#315)
- Qwen3.8 Max: 73.2 (#20)

| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | Qwen3.8 Max |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 1.9% | 100% |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 74.7% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | — | 46.3% |
| ProofBench | — | 58% |
| LMArena Math | — | 1499 |

## Knowledge

- Claude 2.1: 15.4 (#292)
- Qwen3.8 Max: 61.7 (#27)

| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | Qwen3.8 Max |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 33% | 92.7% |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 47.3% |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1507 |
| MMLU | 73.5% | — |

## Multimodal

- Claude 2.1: —
- Qwen3.8 Max: 37.2 (#75)

| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | Qwen3.8 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1314 |
| Furniture Assembly | — | 20% |

## Multilingual

- Claude 2.1: —
- Qwen3.8 Max: 56.7 (#18)

| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | Qwen3.8 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1472 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1538 |
| LMArena French | — | 1503 |
| LMArena German | — | 1483 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1467 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1461 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1481 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1492 |

## Instruction Following

- Claude 2.1: —
- Qwen3.8 Max: 77.6 (#17)

| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | Qwen3.8 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1479 |

## Long Context

- Claude 2.1: —
- Qwen3.8 Max: 45.6 (#31)

| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | Qwen3.8 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1489 |

## Writing & Preference

- Claude 2.1: —
- Qwen3.8 Max: 67.1 (#30)

| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | Qwen3.8 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1483 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1479 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1489 |

## FAQ

### Is Claude 2.1 better than Qwen3.8 Max?

Qwen3.8 Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 56.8 to 25.2 on the Noometry Index.

### Is Claude 2.1 or Qwen3.8 Max better for coding?

Qwen3.8 Max scores higher on coding benchmarks: 53.5 versus 26.2 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do Claude 2.1 and Qwen3.8 Max share?

4 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude 2.1 has 7 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.8 Max has 39.