# Claude Opus 4.5 vs Qwen3 Max

> Claude Opus 4.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.5 to 43.7 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3 Max costs 4.2× 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-qwen3-max
- Last updated: 2026-10-12
- Shared benchmarks: 31

## Summary

- They share 31 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 4.5 scores higher in 7 categories and Qwen3 Max in 1 category; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Claude Opus 4.5 leads 42.6 to 22.6.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is NYT Connections (extended): 52.5% for Claude Opus 4.5 and 30.1% for Qwen3 Max.
- Qwen3 Max is cheaper at $1.20 / $6 per million input/output tokens, against $5 / $25 for Claude Opus 4.5.
- Qwen3 Max accepts more context: 262K tokens versus 200K.

## Snapshot

| | Claude Opus 4.5 | Qwen3 Max |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 50.5 | 43.7 |
| Rank | 47 | 87 |
| Context | 200K | 262K |
| Input $/M | $5 | $1.20 |
| Output $/M | $25 | $6 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |

## Coding

- Claude Opus 4.5: 54.8 (#27)
- Qwen3 Max: 43.0 (#93)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.5 | Qwen3 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1504 | 1456 |
| ALE-Bench | 1,025 | 370.45 |
| SWE-bench Verified | 76.7% | — |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 76.8% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1494 | — |
| SWE-bench Multilingual | 70.7% | — |
| GSO | 26.5% | — |
| WeirdML | 63.7% | — |
| AlgoTune | 1.77 | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Claude Opus 4.5: 47.3 (#12)
- Qwen3 Max: —

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.5 | Qwen3 Max |
|---|---|---|
| Vending-Bench 2 | 4,967 | 71.56 |
| 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% | — |

## Reasoning

- Claude Opus 4.5: 42.6 (#51)
- Qwen3 Max: 22.6 (#190)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.5 | Qwen3 Max |
|---|---|---|
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 80.2% | 72.5% |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 52.5% | 30.1% |
| Chess Puzzles | 12% | 4% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1476 | 1448 |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 22% | 5% |
| DTBench | 89.9% | 82.1% |
| LMCA | 44.5% | 28.3% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 150.09 | 142.38 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 37.6% | — |
| SimpleBench | 62% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 80% | — |
| EnigmaEval | 11.9% | — |
| EBR-Bench | 14.3% | — |
| ForecastBench | 60.7 | — |

## Math

- Claude Opus 4.5: 38.6 (#132)
- Qwen3 Max: 38.7 (#131)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.5 | Qwen3 Max |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 34.4% | 18.9% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 86.1% | 73.3% |
| LMArena Math | 1463 | 1446 |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 4.9% | — |
| ProofBench | 36% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 97.1% |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 20.7% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 4.2% | — |

## Knowledge

- Claude Opus 4.5: 56.5 (#44)
- Qwen3 Max: 48.1 (#78)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.5 | Qwen3 Max |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 86% | 72.6% |
| SimpleQA Verified | 45.7% | 48.7% |
| LMArena Expert | 1487 | 1455 |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 25.2% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 10.9% | — |

## Multimodal

- Claude Opus 4.5: 31.4 (#107)
- Qwen3 Max: —

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.5 | Qwen3 Max |
|---|---|---|
| GeoBench | 75% | — |
| VPCT | 40% | — |
| Furniture Assembly | 28.3% | — |
| LMArena Document | 1462 | — |

## Multilingual

- Claude Opus 4.5: 54.3 (#47)
- Qwen3 Max: 53.7 (#62)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.5 | Qwen3 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1438 | 1429 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1470 | 1478 |
| LMArena French | 1471 | 1449 |
| LMArena German | 1449 | 1463 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1416 | 1397 |
| LMArena Korean | 1424 | 1399 |
| LMArena Russian | 1447 | 1428 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1458 | 1462 |

## Instruction Following

- Claude Opus 4.5: 77.5 (#19)
- Qwen3 Max: 74.8 (#87)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.5 | Qwen3 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1478 | 1419 |

## Long Context

- Claude Opus 4.5: 46.5 (#22)
- Qwen3 Max: 41.6 (#134)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.5 | Qwen3 Max |
|---|---|---|
| CL-bench | 21.1% | 14.5% |
| LMArena Longer Query | 1480 | 1438 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 66.7% |

## Writing & Preference

- Claude Opus 4.5: 68.1 (#28)
- Qwen3 Max: 62.4 (#76)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.5 | Qwen3 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1451 | 1439 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1445 | 1402 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1466 | 1446 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1687 | — |

## FAQ

### Is Claude Opus 4.5 better than Qwen3 Max?

Claude Opus 4.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.5 to 43.7 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3 Max costs 4.2× 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 Qwen3 Max?

Qwen3 Max is cheaper. It lists at $1.20 per million input tokens and $6 per million output tokens; Claude Opus 4.5 lists at $5 and $25.

### Is Claude Opus 4.5 or Qwen3 Max better for coding?

Claude Opus 4.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 54.8 versus 43.0 in the Noometry coding category.

### Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen3 Max does, with 262K tokens against 200K.

### How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 4.5 and Qwen3 Max share?

31 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 4.5 has 69 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3 Max has 33.