Skip to main content
BenchLM
Advertise

Model comparison

Claude Opus 4.5 vs Qwen3.7 Max

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 32 shared benchmark results across 8 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

64.22/100
Margin
8.6pts
winning →
72.84/100
0 category wins7 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: Claude Opus 4.5 #34 (Supported); Qwen3.7 Max #10 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. Claude Opus 4.5 and Qwen3.7 Max share 32 comparable benchmark results. 7 of 8 categories are comparable. 27 results are unique to Claude Opus 4.5; 26 to Qwen3.7 Max.

Updated July 23, 2026
Shared results
32
Claude Opus 4.5 only
27
Qwen3.7 Max only
26
Comparable categories
7 / 8

Pick Qwen3.7 Max if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Claude Opus 4.5 only becomes the better choice if you would rather avoid the extra latency and token burn of a reasoning model.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 32 shared benchmark results across 8 evidence categories; 7 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.

Why this result

Qwen3.7 Max is clearly ahead on the BenchAlign aggregate, 72.84 to 64.22. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.

Qwen3.7 Max's sharpest advantage is in mathematics, where it averages 97.1 against 57.5. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is IFBench, 58% to 79.1%.

Qwen3.7 Max is the reasoning model in the pair, while Claude Opus 4.5 is not. That usually helps on harder chain-of-thought-heavy tests, but it can also mean more latency and more token spend in real use. Qwen3.7 Max gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 200K for Claude Opus 4.5.

Category breakdown

Exact category averages are shown below. Not measured means BenchLM does not have enough sourced public coverage for that model and category.

Category scores and score margins for Claude Opus 4.5 and Qwen3.7 Max
CategoryClaude Opus 4.5ΔQwen3.7 Max
MathClaude Opus 4.557.5Margin→ 39.6Qwen3.7 Max97.1
ReasoningClaude Opus 4.564.4Margin→ 26.0Qwen3.7 Max90.4
Inst. FollowingClaude Opus 4.569.5Margin→ 14.9Qwen3.7 Max84.4
AgenticClaude Opus 4.562.6Margin→ 7.1Qwen3.7 Max69.7
CodingClaude Opus 4.571.7Margin→ 6.2Qwen3.7 Max77.9
KnowledgeClaude Opus 4.558.1Margin→ 6.1Qwen3.7 Max64.2
MultilingualClaude Opus 4.585.7Margin→ 1.3Qwen3.7 Max87.0
MultimodalClaude Opus 4.569.9MarginNo overlapQwen3.7 MaxNot measured

Decisive benchmark drivers

The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.

More
A · Claude Opus 4.5B · Qwen3.7 Max

  1. IFBench

    Inst. Following
    Source ↗
    A 58%B 79.1%
    Winner: Qwen3.7 MaxΔ 21.1
    IFBench: Claude Opus 4.5 scored 58%; Qwen3.7 Max scored 79.1%. Qwen3.7 Max wins this benchmark.

  2. HMMT Feb 2026

    Math
    Source ↗
    A 85.3%B 97.1%
    Winner: Qwen3.7 MaxΔ 11.8
    HMMT Feb 2026: Claude Opus 4.5 scored 85.3%; Qwen3.7 Max scored 97.1%. Qwen3.7 Max wins this benchmark.

  3. HLE

    Knowledge
    Source ↗
    A 30.8%B 41.4%
    Winner: Qwen3.7 MaxΔ 10.6
    HLE: Claude Opus 4.5 scored 30.8%; Qwen3.7 Max scored 41.4%. Qwen3.7 Max wins this benchmark.

  4. Terminal-Bench 2.0

    Agentic
    Source ↗
    A 59.3%B 69.7%
    Winner: Qwen3.7 MaxΔ 10.4
    Terminal-Bench 2.0: Claude Opus 4.5 scored 59.3%; Qwen3.7 Max scored 69.7%. Qwen3.7 Max wins this benchmark.

  5. GPQA

    Knowledge
    Source ↗
    A 87%B 92.4%
    Winner: Qwen3.7 MaxΔ 5.4
    GPQA: Claude Opus 4.5 scored 87%; Qwen3.7 Max scored 92.4%. Qwen3.7 Max wins this benchmark.

Operational comparison

Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.

MetricClaude Opus 4.5Qwen3.7 MaxComparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensClaude Opus 4.5$5 input / $25 outputQwen3.7 MaxNot availableA complete price comparison is not available.
Generation speedtokens per secondClaude Opus 4.546 tok/sQwen3.7 MaxNot availableA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenClaude Opus 4.51.01 sQwen3.7 MaxNot availableA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensClaude Opus 4.5200KQwen3.7 Max1MQwen3.7 Max lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

AgenticQwen3.7 Max wins
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Qwen3.7 MaxResult
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 59.3%69.7%Qwen3.7 Max leads
OSWorld-VerifiedSource 66.3%—Not comparable
OSWorldSource 66.3%—Not comparable
Claw-EvalSource 59.6%65.2%Qwen3.7 Max leads
QwenClawBenchSource 52.3%64.3%Qwen3.7 Max leads
τ³-bench resultsSource 70.2%—Not comparable
VITA-BenchSource 23.3%47.9%Qwen3.7 Max leads
DeepPlanningSource 26.4%—Not comparable
ToolathlonSource 43.5%—Not comparable
MCP AtlasSource 42.3%76.4%Qwen3.7 Max leads
MCP-TasksSource 71.8%—Not comparable
WideResearchSource 76.4%—Not comparable
CyberGymSource 50.6%—Not comparable
τ²-bench resultsSource 86.3%94.7%Qwen3.7 Max leads
Gert LabsSource 64.23%64.27%Qwen3.7 Max leads
JobBenchSource 32.3%—Not comparable
QwenWebBenchSource —1568Not comparable
BFCL v4Source —75.0%Not comparable
HLE w/ toolsSource —53.5%Not comparable
AA Agentic IndexSource —30.6%Not comparable
GDPval-AASource —38.7%Not comparable
GDPval-AASource —1273Not comparable
ResearchClawBenchSource —18.7%Not comparable
AA BriefcaseSource —908Not comparable
AA AutomationBenchSource —25.6%Not comparable
AA EnterpriseOps-GymSource —45.0%Not comparable
AA ITBenchSource —42.5%Not comparable
terminalBenchHardSource —50.8%Not comparable
aaTerminalBench21Source —74.5%Not comparable
AA Harvey LABSource —83.4%Not comparable
CodingQwen3.7 Max wins
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Qwen3.7 MaxResult
SWE-bench VerifiedSource 80.9%80.4%Claude Opus 4.5 leads
LiveCodeBench v6Source 84.8%—Not comparable
SWE-bench ProSource 57.1%60.6%Qwen3.7 Max leads
SWE MultilingualSource 77.5%78.3%Qwen3.7 Max leads
NL2RepoSource 43.2%47.2%Qwen3.7 Max leads
AA-SciCodeSource 47.0%48.8%Qwen3.7 Max leads
SciCodeSource —53.5%Not comparable
LiveCodeBenchSource —91.6%Not comparable
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source —69.7%Not comparable
AA Coding IndexSource —66.0%Not comparable
ReasoningQwen3.7 Max wins
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Qwen3.7 MaxResult
LongBench v2Source 64.4%—Not comparable
AI-NeedleSource 74%—Not comparable
AA-LCRSource 65.3%69.0%Qwen3.7 Max leads
CritPtSource 0.3%13.4%Qwen3.7 Max leads
MRCRv2Source —90.4%Not comparable
KnowledgeQwen3.7 Max wins
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Qwen3.7 MaxResult
GPQASource 87%92.4%Qwen3.7 Max leads
SuperGPQASource 70.6%73.6%Qwen3.7 Max leads
MMLU-ProSource 89.5%89.6%Qwen3.7 Max leads
MMLU-ReduxSource 96.6%95%Claude Opus 4.5 leads
C-EvalSource 92.2%—Not comparable
HLESource 30.8%41.4%Qwen3.7 Max leads
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 34.7%46.0%Qwen3.7 Max leads
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 81.0%92.3%Qwen3.7 Max leads
AA-HLESource 12.9%38.1%Qwen3.7 Max leads
AA-Omniscience IndexSource -3.9%14.1%Qwen3.7 Max leads
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 40.7%30.1%Claude Opus 4.5 leads
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 75.4%22.9%Qwen3.7 Max leads
AA MMLU-ProSource 88.9%—Not comparable
GPQA-DSource —92.4%Not comparable
MMMLUSource —90.3%Not comparable
MathQwen3.7 Max wins
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Qwen3.7 MaxResult
AIME26Source 95.1%—Not comparable
HMMT Feb 2025Source 92.9%—Not comparable
HMMT Nov 2025Source 93.3%—Not comparable
HMMT Feb 2026Source 85.3%97.1%Qwen3.7 Max leads
MMAnswerBenchSource 84.0%—Not comparable
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)Source 20.690%—Not comparable
FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)Source 4.167%—Not comparable
IMOAnswerBenchSource —90.0%Not comparable
ApexSource —44.5%Not comparable
MultilingualQwen3.7 Max wins
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Qwen3.7 MaxResult
MMLU-ProXSource 85.7%87%Qwen3.7 Max leads
NOVA-63Source 56.7%59.0%Qwen3.7 Max leads
INCLUDESource —86.2%Not comparable
MAXIFESource —89.2%Not comparable
PolyMathSource —86.5%Not comparable
Multimodal
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Qwen3.7 MaxResult
MMMU-ProSource 70.6%—Not comparable
MathVisionSource 74.3%—Not comparable
CharXivSource 68.5%—Not comparable
VideoMMMUSource 84.4%—Not comparable
ScreenSpot ProSource 45.7%—Not comparable
V*Source 67.0%—Not comparable
AA-MMMU-ProSource 71.2%—Not comparable
Design Arena WebsiteSource 12771293Qwen3.7 Max leads
Inst. FollowingQwen3.7 Max wins
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Qwen3.7 MaxResult
IFEvalSource 90.9%94.3%Qwen3.7 Max leads
IFBenchSource 58%79.1%Qwen3.7 Max leads
AA-IFBenchSource 43.0%80.5%Qwen3.7 Max leads
Frequently Asked Questions (8)

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

Qwen3.7 Max is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 72.84 to 64.22. The biggest single separator in this matchup is IFBench, where the scores are 58% and 79.1%.

Which is better for knowledge tasks, Claude Opus 4.5 or Qwen3.7 Max?

Qwen3.7 Max has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 64.2 versus 58.1. Inside this category, AA-Omniscience Hallucination Rate is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for coding, Claude Opus 4.5 or Qwen3.7 Max?

Qwen3.7 Max has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 77.9 versus 71.7. Inside this category, NL2Repo is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for math, Claude Opus 4.5 or Qwen3.7 Max?

Qwen3.7 Max has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 97.1 versus 57.5. Inside this category, HMMT Feb 2026 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for reasoning, Claude Opus 4.5 or Qwen3.7 Max?

Qwen3.7 Max has the edge for reasoning in this comparison, averaging 90.4 versus 64.4. Inside this category, CritPt is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for agentic tasks, Claude Opus 4.5 or Qwen3.7 Max?

Qwen3.7 Max has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 69.7 versus 62.6. Inside this category, MCP Atlas is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for instruction following, Claude Opus 4.5 or Qwen3.7 Max?

Qwen3.7 Max has the edge for instruction following in this comparison, averaging 84.4 versus 69.5. Inside this category, AA-IFBench is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for multilingual tasks, Claude Opus 4.5 or Qwen3.7 Max?

Qwen3.7 Max has the edge for multilingual tasks in this comparison, averaging 87 versus 85.7. Inside this category, NOVA-63 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Related Comparisons

Explore More

Anthropic Compare Pricing Methodology Find Your Best LLM Overall Rankings
Last updated: July 23, 2026

Choose a model with this week’s evidence

Join 2,000+ readers for ranking moves, pricing changes, and the claims that still need proof.

One email each week. Unsubscribe anytime.