Noometry

Model comparison

Claude Opus 5.5 vs Qwen1.5-110B

Claude Opus 5.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 68.6 to 34.2 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 14 shared benchmarks.

Claude Opus 5.5 Anthropic

68.6

Rank #3 Confirmed

Qwen1.5-110B Alibaba (Qwen)

34.2

Rank #234 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 14 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 5.5 scores higher in 8 categories and Qwen1.5-110B in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where Claude Opus 5.5 leads 91.8 to 33.7.
  • Qwen1.5-110B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Claude Opus 5.5Qwen1.5-110B
ProviderAnthropicAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index68.634.2
Released2026-09-222024-04-25
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1M—
Max output128K—
Input $ / M tokens$4—
Output $ / M tokens$20—
Results tracked4420

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

Category by category

Coding Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 71.9 (#3), Qwen1.5-110B: 33.0 (#264)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen1.5-110B
LMArena Coding15471184
FrontierCode54.6%—
CursorBench57.8%—
LMArena WebDev1813—
FrontierSWE62.3%—
SciCode66.9%—
BigCodeBench Instruct—35%
MirrorCode77.4%—
BigCodeBench Complete—44.4%
ALE-Bench2,147—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Claude Opus 5.5: 45.3 (#15), Qwen1.5-110B: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen1.5-110B
APEX-Agents73.5%—
GDP.pdf30.6%—
Vending-Bench 29,235—

Reasoning Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 80.2 (#3), Qwen1.5-110B: 22.7 (#189)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen1.5-110B
LMArena Hard Prompts15351168
ARC-AGI-293.3%—
NYT Connections (extended)88.5%—
ARC-AGI-198.5%—
CritPt31.7%—
EBR-Bench71.4%—
Mystery Game Puzzles71%—
DTBench98.9%—
LMCA68.2%—
Epoch Capabilities Index167.33—
ForecastBench—57.7

Math Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 91.8 (#3), Qwen1.5-110B: 33.7 (#201)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen1.5-110B
LMArena Math15061185
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)91.2%—
FrontierMath Tier 495%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025100%—
ProofBench100%—
FrontierMath Erdős2.9%—

Knowledge Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 66.4 (#10), Qwen1.5-110B: 31.2 (#219)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen1.5-110B
LMArena Expert15471144
GPQA Diamond90.6%—
SimpleQA Verified72.2%—

Multimodal Not comparable

Claude Opus 5.5: 57.8 (#1), Qwen1.5-110B: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen1.5-110B
LMArena Vision1321—
Blueprint-Bench 251.2%—
Furniture Assembly83.3%—

Multilingual Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 59.1 (#2), Qwen1.5-110B: 33.6 (#250)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen1.5-110B
LMArena Non-English15071142
LMArena Chinese15881206
LMArena French15141151
LMArena Russian15201118
LMArena Spanish15071142
LMArena German—1123
LMArena Japanese—1074
LMArena Korean—1044

Instruction Following Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 80.0 (#3), Qwen1.5-110B: 60.3 (#252)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen1.5-110B
LMArena Instruction Following15371158

Long Context Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 47.1 (#19), Qwen1.5-110B: 35.1 (#242)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen1.5-110B
LMArena Longer Query15321157

Writing & Preference Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 78.2 (#3), Qwen1.5-110B: 38.0 (#255)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen1.5-110B
LMArena Text15151175
LMArena Creative Writing15331148
LMArena Multi-Turn14991160
EQ-Bench Creative Writing2050—

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Opus 5.5 better than Qwen1.5-110B?

Claude Opus 5.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 68.6 to 34.2 on the Noometry Index.

Is Claude Opus 5.5 or Qwen1.5-110B better for coding?

Claude Opus 5.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 71.9 versus 33.0 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 5.5 and Qwen1.5-110B share?

14 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 5.5 has 44 scored results on Noometry and Qwen1.5-110B has 20.

Related comparisons

Go deeper