Model comparison

Claude 2.1 vs Qwen2-72B

Qwen2-72B is the stronger model overall, scoring 29.5 to 24.9 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 4 shared benchmarks.

Claude 2.1 Anthropic

24.9

Rank #340 Reported

Qwen2-72B Alibaba (Qwen)

29.5

Rank #294 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 4 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude 2.1 scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen2-72B in 4 categories; 4 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where Qwen2-72B leads 27.9 to 9.6.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is GPQA Diamond: 33% for Claude 2.1 and 40.8% for Qwen2-72B.
  • Qwen2-72B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Claude 2.1 and Qwen2-72B specifications
Claude 2.1Qwen2-72B
ProviderAnthropicAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index24.929.5
Released2023-11-212024-06-07
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window——
Max output——
Input $ / M tokens——
Output $ / M tokens——
Results tracked726

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

Category by category

Coding Qwen2-72B leads

Claude 2.1: 25.8 (#322), Qwen2-72B: 28.7 (#303)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude 2.1Qwen2-72B
WeirdML7.1%11.3%
BigCodeBench Instruct—38.5%
LMArena Coding—1196
BigCodeBench Complete—54%

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Claude 2.1: —, Qwen2-72B: 16.9 (#138)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude 2.1Qwen2-72B
TheAgentCompany—1.1%
METR Time Horizons—29.9%

Reasoning Qwen2-72B leads

Claude 2.1: 20.6 (#216), Qwen2-72B: 22.2 (#184)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude 2.1Qwen2-72B
Epoch Capabilities Index119.22125.27
LMArena Hard Prompts—1191
DTBench51%—
ForecastBench54.2—

Math Qwen2-72B leads

Claude 2.1: 9.6 (#309), Qwen2-72B: 27.9 (#232)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude 2.1Qwen2-72B
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-20251.9%—
LMArena Math—1235
MATH Level 5—39.1%

Knowledge Qwen2-72B leads

Claude 2.1: 15.5 (#287), Qwen2-72B: 21.2 (#270)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude 2.1Qwen2-72B
GPQA Diamond33%40.8%
MMLU73.5%82.4%
LMArena Expert—1171

Multilingual Not comparable

Claude 2.1: —, Qwen2-72B: 36.0 (#239)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude 2.1Qwen2-72B
LMArena Non-English—1176
LMArena Chinese—1240
LMArena French—1169
LMArena German—1151
LMArena Japanese—1111
LMArena Korean—1083
LMArena Russian—1169
LMArena Spanish—1168

Instruction Following Not comparable

Claude 2.1: —, Qwen2-72B: 62.0 (#236)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude 2.1Qwen2-72B
LMArena Instruction Following—1181

Long Context Not comparable

Claude 2.1: —, Qwen2-72B: 36.1 (#230)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude 2.1Qwen2-72B
LMArena Longer Query—1193

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Claude 2.1: —, Qwen2-72B: 41.0 (#236)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude 2.1Qwen2-72B
LMArena Text—1203
LMArena Creative Writing—1181
LMArena Multi-Turn—1195

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude 2.1 better than Qwen2-72B?

Qwen2-72B is the stronger model overall, scoring 29.5 to 24.9 on the Noometry Index.

Is Claude 2.1 or Qwen2-72B better for coding?

Qwen2-72B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 28.7 versus 25.8 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Claude 2.1 and Qwen2-72B share?

4 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude 2.1 has 7 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2-72B has 26.

Related comparisons

Go deeper