Model comparison

Claude Opus 5.5 vs Qwen-7B

Claude Opus 5.5 has enough public results to be ranked (#3); Qwen-7B does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.

Last verified . 1 shared benchmarks.

Claude Opus 5.5 Anthropic

68.6

Rank #3 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 1 benchmark with published results for both.
  • Qwen-7B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Claude Opus 5.5 and Qwen-7B specifications
Claude Opus 5.5Qwen-7B
ProviderAnthropicAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index68.6—
Released2026-09-222023-09-28
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1M—
Max output128K—
Input $ / M tokens$4—
Output $ / M tokens$20—
Results tracked448

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

Category by category

Coding Not comparable

Claude Opus 5.5: 71.9 (#3), Qwen-7B: —

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen-7B
FrontierCode54.6%—
CursorBench57.8%—
LMArena WebDev1813—
FrontierSWE62.3%—
SciCode66.9%—
LMArena Coding1547—
MirrorCode77.4%—
ALE-Bench2,147—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Claude Opus 5.5: 45.3 (#15), Qwen-7B: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen-7B
APEX-Agents73.5%—
GDP.pdf30.6%—
Vending-Bench 29,235—

Reasoning Not comparable

Claude Opus 5.5: 80.2 (#3), Qwen-7B: —

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen-7B
Epoch Capabilities Index167.33106.83
ARC-AGI-293.3%—
NYT Connections (extended)88.5%—
ARC-AGI-198.5%—
CritPt31.7%—
EBR-Bench71.4%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1535—
Mystery Game Puzzles71%—
DTBench98.9%—
LMCA68.2%—
BIG-Bench Hard—45%
LAMBADA—67.9%
PIQA—77.9%

Math Not comparable

Claude Opus 5.5: 91.8 (#3), Qwen-7B: —

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen-7B
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)91.2%—
FrontierMath Tier 495%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025100%—
ProofBench100%—
LMArena Math1506—
FrontierMath Erdős2.9%—
GSM8K—51.7%

Knowledge Not comparable

Claude Opus 5.5: 66.4 (#10), Qwen-7B: —

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen-7B
GPQA Diamond90.6%—
SimpleQA Verified72.2%—
LMArena Expert1547—
ARC (AI2) Challenge—75.3%
BoolQ—76.4%
MMLU—45%

Multimodal Not comparable

Claude Opus 5.5: 57.8 (#1), Qwen-7B: —

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen-7B
LMArena Vision1321—
Blueprint-Bench 251.2%—
Furniture Assembly83.3%—

Multilingual Not comparable

Claude Opus 5.5: 59.1 (#2), Qwen-7B: —

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen-7B
LMArena Non-English1507—
LMArena Chinese1588—
LMArena French1514—
LMArena Russian1520—
LMArena Spanish1507—

Instruction Following Not comparable

Claude Opus 5.5: 80.0 (#3), Qwen-7B: —

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen-7B
LMArena Instruction Following1537—

Long Context Not comparable

Claude Opus 5.5: 47.1 (#19), Qwen-7B: —

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen-7B
LMArena Longer Query1532—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Claude Opus 5.5: 78.2 (#3), Qwen-7B: —

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen-7B
LMArena Text1515—
LMArena Creative Writing1533—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing2050—
LMArena Multi-Turn1499—

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Opus 5.5 better than Qwen-7B?

Claude Opus 5.5 has enough public results to be ranked (#3); Qwen-7B does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.

How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 5.5 and Qwen-7B share?

1 benchmark has published results for both models. Claude Opus 5.5 has 44 scored results on Noometry and Qwen-7B has 8.

Related comparisons

Go deeper