Noometry

Model comparison

Claude Opus 4 vs Qwen1.5-7B

Claude Opus 4 is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.1 to 31.4 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 12 shared benchmarks.

Claude Opus 4 Anthropic

43.1

Rank #100 Confirmed

Qwen1.5-7B Alibaba (Qwen)

31.4

Rank #273 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 4 scores higher in 8 categories and Qwen1.5-7B in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Claude Opus 4 leads 61.2 to 29.6.
  • Qwen1.5-7B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Claude Opus 4Qwen1.5-7B
ProviderAnthropicAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index43.131.4
Released2025-05-222024-02-04
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window200K—
Max output32K—
Input $ / M tokens$15—
Output $ / M tokens$75—
Results tracked5613

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

Category by category

Coding Claude Opus 4 leads

Claude Opus 4: 47.2 (#62), Qwen1.5-7B: 32.2 (#276)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4Qwen1.5-7B
LMArena Coding14421107
SWE-bench Verified70.7%—
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)67.6%—
Aider Polyglot72%—
GSO6.9%—
WeirdML43.7%—
AlgoTune1.33—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Claude Opus 4: 34.8 (#42), Qwen1.5-7B: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4Qwen1.5-7B
Cybench38%—
DeepResearch Bench46.8%—
LMArena Search1127—
METR Time Horizons63.9%—

Reasoning Claude Opus 4 leads

Claude Opus 4: 27.3 (#121), Qwen1.5-7B: 20.4 (#240)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4Qwen1.5-7B
LMArena Hard Prompts13991065
ARC-AGI-28.6%—
SimpleBench58.8%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark74.3%—
ARC-AGI-135.7%—
CritPt0.3%—
EnigmaEval5.6%—
DTBench81.6%—
LMCA37.4%—
Epoch Capabilities Index142.67—
ForecastBench61.1—

Math Claude Opus 4 leads

Claude Opus 4: 42.0 (#86), Qwen1.5-7B: 31.4 (#224)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4Qwen1.5-7B
LMArena Math13901080
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202564.4%—
Omni-MATH61.6%—
MATH Level 585%—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)4.5%—
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)4.2%—

Knowledge Claude Opus 4 leads

Claude Opus 4: 44.0 (#88), Qwen1.5-7B: 28.7 (#243)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4Qwen1.5-7B
LMArena Expert13861055
GPQA Diamond76.3%—
Humanity's Last Exam10.7%—
MMLU-Pro87.5%—
Confabulations15.9%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate12%—
GPQA (HELM)70.8%—
MMLU—62.6%

Multimodal Not comparable

Claude Opus 4: 31.5 (#106), Qwen1.5-7B: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4Qwen1.5-7B
LMArena Vision1192—
GeoBench49%—
VPCT38%—

Multilingual Claude Opus 4 leads

Claude Opus 4: 48.8 (#138), Qwen1.5-7B: 28.5 (#271)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4Qwen1.5-7B
LMArena Non-English13621058
LMArena Chinese13861141
LMArena Russian13921006
LMArena French1372—
LMArena German1391—
LMArena Japanese1331—
LMArena Korean1321—
LMArena Spanish1389—

Instruction Following Claude Opus 4 leads

Claude Opus 4: 77.1 (#28), Qwen1.5-7B: 54.1 (#281)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4Qwen1.5-7B
LMArena Instruction Following14061058
IFEval91.8%—

Long Context Claude Opus 4 leads

Claude Opus 4: 39.6 (#172), Qwen1.5-7B: 33.1 (#266)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4Qwen1.5-7B
LMArena Longer Query14221090
Fiction.LiveBench61.1%—

Writing & Preference Claude Opus 4 leads

Claude Opus 4: 61.2 (#89), Qwen1.5-7B: 29.6 (#293)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4Qwen1.5-7B
LMArena Text13771083
LMArena Creative Writing13871035
LMArena Multi-Turn13961062
Short-Story Creative Writing83.6%—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1580—
WildBench85.2%—

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Opus 4 better than Qwen1.5-7B?

Claude Opus 4 is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.1 to 31.4 on the Noometry Index.

Is Claude Opus 4 or Qwen1.5-7B better for coding?

Claude Opus 4 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 47.2 versus 32.2 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 4 and Qwen1.5-7B share?

12 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 4 has 56 scored results on Noometry and Qwen1.5-7B has 13.

Related comparisons

Go deeper