Noometry

Model comparison

Claude Opus 4.5 vs Qwen3.7 Max

Qwen3.7 Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.5 to 50.5 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 29 shared benchmarks.

Claude Opus 4.5 Anthropic

50.5

Rank #47 Confirmed

Qwen3.7 Max Alibaba (Qwen)

51.5

Rank #42 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 29 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 4.5 scores higher in 5 categories and Qwen3.7 Max in 4 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in agentic & tool use, where Claude Opus 4.5 leads 47.3 to 22.1.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is NYT Connections (extended): 52.5% for Claude Opus 4.5 and 85.1% for Qwen3.7 Max.
  • Qwen3.7 Max is cheaper at $2.50 / $7.50 per million input/output tokens, against $5 / $25 for Claude Opus 4.5.
  • Qwen3.7 Max accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 200K.

Side by side

Claude Opus 4.5Qwen3.7 Max
ProviderAnthropicAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index50.551.5
Released2025-11-012026-05-19
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
Context window200K1M
Max output64K131K
Input $ / M tokens$5$2.50
Output $ / M tokens$25$7.50
Results tracked6933

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

Category by category

Coding Claude Opus 4.5 leads

Claude Opus 4.5: 54.8 (#27), Qwen3.7 Max: 50.4 (#45)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Qwen3.7 Max
SWE-bench Verified76.7%77.3%
LMArena WebDev14941515
LMArena Coding15041498
ALE-Bench1,0251,189
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)76.8%—
SWE-bench Multilingual70.7%—
SciCode—48.8%
GSO26.5%—
WeirdML63.7%—
AlgoTune1.77—

Agentic & Tool Use Claude Opus 4.5 leads

Claude Opus 4.5: 47.3 (#12), Qwen3.7 Max: 22.1 (#135)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Qwen3.7 Max
Terminal-Bench63.1%—
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard77.5%—
GDPval45.5%—
Remote Labor Index3.8%—
τ²-bench Airline84%—
τ²-bench Banking24.7%—
τ²-bench Retail79.6%—
τ²-bench Telecom92.3%—
Cybench82%—
DeepResearch Bench54.8%—
OSWorld66.3%—
BALROG43.5%—
GBAEval—0.4%
LMArena Search1180—
METR Time Horizons75%—
Vending-Bench 24,967—

Reasoning Qwen3.7 Max leads

Claude Opus 4.5: 42.6 (#51), Qwen3.7 Max: 49.2 (#38)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Qwen3.7 Max
SimpleBench62%70.4%
NYT Connections (extended)52.5%85.1%
Chess Puzzles12%19%
EBR-Bench14.3%9.5%
LMArena Hard Prompts14761483
Mystery Game Puzzles22%32%
DTBench89.9%92.3%
LMCA44.5%44%
Epoch Capabilities Index150.09153.68
ARC-AGI-237.6%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark80.2%—
ARC-AGI-180%—
CritPt—13.4%
EnigmaEval11.9%—
ForecastBench60.7—

Math Qwen3.7 Max leads

Claude Opus 4.5: 38.6 (#132), Qwen3.7 Max: 62.4 (#32)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Qwen3.7 Max
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)34.4%64.6%
FrontierMath Tier 44.9%34.1%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202586.1%95.6%
ProofBench36%26%
LMArena Math14631490
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)20.7%—
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)4.2%—

Knowledge Qwen3.7 Max leads

Claude Opus 4.5: 56.5 (#44), Qwen3.7 Max: 61.6 (#28)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Qwen3.7 Max
GPQA Diamond86%90.9%
SimpleQA Verified45.7%55.8%
LMArena Expert14871488
Humanity's Last Exam25.2%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate10.9%—

Multimodal Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.5: 31.4 (#107), Qwen3.7 Max: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Qwen3.7 Max
GeoBench75%—
VPCT40%—
Furniture Assembly28.3%—
LMArena Document1462—

Multilingual Qwen3.7 Max leads

Claude Opus 4.5: 54.3 (#47), Qwen3.7 Max: 56.9 (#15)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Qwen3.7 Max
LMArena Non-English14381474
LMArena Chinese14701530
LMArena Russian14471484
LMArena French1471—
LMArena German1449—
LMArena Japanese1416—
LMArena Korean1424—
LMArena Spanish1458—

Instruction Following Too close to call

Claude Opus 4.5: 77.5 (#19), Qwen3.7 Max: 76.7 (#38)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Qwen3.7 Max
LMArena Instruction Following14781460

Long Context Claude Opus 4.5 leads

Claude Opus 4.5: 46.5 (#22), Qwen3.7 Max: 45.4 (#40)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Qwen3.7 Max
LMArena Longer Query14801482
CL-bench21.1%—

Writing & Preference Claude Opus 4.5 leads

Claude Opus 4.5: 68.1 (#28), Qwen3.7 Max: 65.0 (#54)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Qwen3.7 Max
LMArena Text14511476
LMArena Creative Writing14451449
LMArena Multi-Turn14661481
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1687—
EQ-Bench 4—1110

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Opus 4.5 better than Qwen3.7 Max?

Qwen3.7 Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.5 to 50.5 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.5 or Qwen3.7 Max?

Qwen3.7 Max is cheaper. It lists at $2.50 per million input tokens and $7.50 per million output tokens; Claude Opus 4.5 lists at $5 and $25.

Is Claude Opus 4.5 or Qwen3.7 Max better for coding?

Claude Opus 4.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 54.8 versus 50.4 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen3.7 Max does, with 1M tokens against 200K.

How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 4.5 and Qwen3.7 Max share?

29 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 4.5 has 69 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.7 Max has 33.

Related comparisons

Go deeper