# Claude Opus 4.5 vs Qwen Max

> Claude Opus 4.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.5 to 34.4 on the Noometry Index. Qwen Max costs 3.6× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 4.5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/claude-opus-4-5-vs-qwen-max
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 20

## Summary

- They share 20 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 4.5 scores higher in 8 categories and Qwen Max in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Claude Opus 4.5 leads 56.4 to 30.3.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 86.1% for Claude Opus 4.5 and 16.1% for Qwen Max.
- Qwen Max is cheaper at $1.60 / $6.40 per million input/output tokens, against $5 / $25 for Claude Opus 4.5.
- Claude Opus 4.5 accepts more context: 200K tokens versus 33K.

## Snapshot

| | Claude Opus 4.5 | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 50.5 | 34.4 |
| Rank | 39 | 226 |
| Context | 200K | 33K |
| Input $/M | $5 | $1.60 |
| Output $/M | $25 | $6.40 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |

## Coding

- Claude Opus 4.5: 55.4 (#21)
- Qwen Max: 30.3 (#288)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.5 | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1504 | 1288 |
| SWE-bench Verified | 76.7% | — |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 76.8% | — |
| Aider Polyglot | — | 21.8% |
| LMArena WebDev | 1493 | — |
| SWE-bench Multilingual | 70.7% | — |
| GSO | 26.5% | — |
| WeirdML | 63.7% | — |
| ALE-Bench | 1,025 | — |
| AlgoTune | 1.77 | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Claude Opus 4.5: 47.2 (#11)
- Qwen Max: —

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.5 | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | 63.1% | — |
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 77.5% | — |
| GDPval | 45.5% | — |
| Remote Labor Index | 3.8% | — |
| τ²-bench Airline | 84% | — |
| τ²-bench Banking | 24.7% | — |
| τ²-bench Retail | 79.6% | — |
| τ²-bench Telecom | 92.3% | — |
| Cybench | 82% | — |
| DeepResearch Bench | 54.8% | — |
| OSWorld | 66.3% | — |
| BALROG | 43.5% | — |
| LMArena Search | 1180 | — |
| METR Time Horizons | 75% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 4,967 | — |

## Reasoning

- Claude Opus 4.5: 42.5 (#43)
- Qwen Max: 24.1 (#154)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.5 | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1476 | 1270 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 37.6% | — |
| SimpleBench | 62% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 80.2% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 52.5% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 80% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 12% | — |
| EnigmaEval | 11.9% | — |
| EBR-Bench | 14.3% | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 22% | — |
| DTBench | 89.9% | — |
| LMCA | 44.5% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 150.1 | — |
| ForecastBench | 60.7 | — |

## Math

- Claude Opus 4.5: 38.5 (#85)
- Qwen Max: 21.0 (#272)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.5 | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 86.1% | 16.1% |
| LMArena Math | 1463 | 1275 |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 20.7% | 1% |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 34.4% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 4.9% | — |
| ProofBench | 36% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 67.2% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 4.2% | — |

## Knowledge

- Claude Opus 4.5: 56.4 (#38)
- Qwen Max: 30.3 (#222)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.5 | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 86% | 56.1% |
| LMArena Expert | 1488 | 1248 |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 25.2% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | 45.7% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 10.9% | — |

## Multimodal

- Claude Opus 4.5: 31.1 (#99)
- Qwen Max: —

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.5 | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| GeoBench | 75% | — |
| VPCT | 40% | — |
| Furniture Assembly | 28.3% | — |
| LMArena Document | 1462 | — |

## Multilingual

- Claude Opus 4.5: 54.5 (#45)
- Qwen Max: 42.0 (#197)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.5 | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1438 | 1263 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1470 | 1254 |
| LMArena French | 1471 | 1329 |
| LMArena German | 1449 | 1254 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1415 | 1205 |
| LMArena Korean | 1424 | 1141 |
| LMArena Russian | 1448 | 1274 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1455 | 1290 |

## Instruction Following

- Claude Opus 4.5: 77.7 (#20)
- Qwen Max: 66.7 (#203)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.5 | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1478 | 1262 |

## Long Context

- Claude Opus 4.5: 46.4 (#21)
- Qwen Max: 39.4 (#175)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.5 | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1480 | 1289 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 66.7% |
| CL-bench | 21.1% | — |

## Writing & Preference

- Claude Opus 4.5: 68.2 (#28)
- Qwen Max: 48.0 (#200)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.5 | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1451 | 1282 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1445 | 1248 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1466 | 1277 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1687 | — |

## FAQ

### Is Claude Opus 4.5 better than Qwen Max?

Claude Opus 4.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.5 to 34.4 on the Noometry Index. Qwen Max costs 3.6× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 4.5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

### Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.5 or Qwen Max?

Qwen Max is cheaper. It lists at $1.60 per million input tokens and $6.40 per million output tokens; Claude Opus 4.5 lists at $5 and $25.

### Is Claude Opus 4.5 or Qwen Max better for coding?

Claude Opus 4.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 55.4 versus 30.3 in the Noometry coding category.

### Which has the bigger context window?

Claude Opus 4.5 does, with 200K tokens against 33K.

### How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 4.5 and Qwen Max share?

20 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 4.5 has 69 scored results on Noometry and Qwen Max has 23.