Noometry

Model comparison

Claude Opus 5.5 vs Qwen2.5-Max

Claude Opus 5.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 68.6 to 40.7 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 15 shared benchmarks.

Claude Opus 5.5 Anthropic

68.6

Rank #3 Confirmed

Qwen2.5-Max Alibaba (Qwen)

40.7

Rank #146 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 15 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 5.5 scores higher in 8 categories and Qwen2.5-Max 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 36.9.

Side by side

Claude Opus 5.5Qwen2.5-Max
ProviderAnthropicAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index68.640.7
Released2026-09-222025-01-25
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
Context window1M—
Max output128K—
Input $ / M tokens$4—
Output $ / M tokens$20—
Results tracked4427

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), Qwen2.5-Max: 41.8 (#117)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen2.5-Max
LMArena Coding15471359
FrontierCode54.6%—
CursorBench57.8%—
LMArena WebDev1813—
FrontierSWE62.3%—
SciCode66.9%—
LiveBench Coding—64.4%
MirrorCode77.4%—
ALE-Bench2,147—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Claude Opus 5.5: 45.3 (#15), Qwen2.5-Max: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen2.5-Max
APEX-Agents73.5%—
GDP.pdf30.6%—
Vending-Bench 29,235—

Reasoning Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 80.2 (#3), Qwen2.5-Max: 25.6 (#147)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen2.5-Max
LMArena Hard Prompts15351360
Epoch Capabilities Index167.33132.53
ARC-AGI-293.3%—
NYT Connections (extended)88.5%—
ARC-AGI-198.5%—
CritPt31.7%—
EBR-Bench71.4%—
LiveBench Reasoning—51.4%
Mystery Game Puzzles71%—
DTBench98.9%—
LiveBench Data Analysis—67.9%
LMCA68.2%—
LiveBench—62.3%

Math Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 91.8 (#3), Qwen2.5-Max: 36.9 (#162)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen2.5-Max
LMArena Math15061369
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)91.2%—
FrontierMath Tier 495%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025100%—
ProofBench100%—
LiveBench Math—58.4%
FrontierMath Erdős2.9%—

Knowledge Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 66.4 (#10), Qwen2.5-Max: 35.3 (#186)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen2.5-Max
LMArena Expert15471337
GPQA Diamond90.6%—
SimpleQA Verified72.2%—
Confabulations—21.8%

Multimodal Not comparable

Claude Opus 5.5: 57.8 (#1), Qwen2.5-Max: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen2.5-Max
LMArena Vision1321—
Blueprint-Bench 251.2%—
Furniture Assembly83.3%—

Multilingual Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 59.1 (#2), Qwen2.5-Max: 48.1 (#146)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen2.5-Max
LMArena Non-English15071352
LMArena Chinese15881382
LMArena French15141396
LMArena Russian15201353
LMArena Spanish15071377
LMArena German—1350
LMArena Japanese—1300
LMArena Korean—1304

Instruction Following Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 80.0 (#3), Qwen2.5-Max: 71.3 (#152)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen2.5-Max
LMArena Instruction Following15371335
LiveBench Instruction Following—75.3%

Long Context Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 47.1 (#19), Qwen2.5-Max: 41.4 (#142)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen2.5-Max
LMArena Longer Query15321358

Writing & Preference Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 78.2 (#3), Qwen2.5-Max: 55.4 (#146)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen2.5-Max
LMArena Text15151367
LMArena Creative Writing15331339
LMArena Multi-Turn14991364
Short-Story Creative Writing—72.9%
EQ-Bench Creative Writing2050—
LiveBench Language—56.3%

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Opus 5.5 better than Qwen2.5-Max?

Claude Opus 5.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 68.6 to 40.7 on the Noometry Index.

Is Claude Opus 5.5 or Qwen2.5-Max better for coding?

Claude Opus 5.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 71.9 versus 41.8 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 5.5 and Qwen2.5-Max share?

15 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 5.5 has 44 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5-Max has 27.

Related comparisons

Go deeper