Head-to-head comparison across 7benchmark categories. Overall scores shown here use BenchLM's provisional ranking lane.
Claude Opus 4.5
76
Qwen3.7 Plus
87
Verified leaderboard positions: Claude Opus 4.5 #14 · Qwen3.7 Plus #3
Pick Qwen3.7 Plus if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Claude Opus 4.5 only becomes the better choice if multilingual is the priority or you would rather avoid the extra latency and token burn of a reasoning model.
Agentic
+9.2 difference
Coding
+5.2 difference
Reasoning
+27.3 difference
Knowledge
+1.7 difference
Multilingual
+0.3 difference
Multimodal
+11.1 difference
Inst. Following
+9.8 difference
Claude Opus 4.5
Qwen3.7 Plus
$5 / $25
N/A
46 t/s
N/A
1.01s
N/A
200K
1M
Pick Qwen3.7 Plus if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Claude Opus 4.5 only becomes the better choice if multilingual is the priority or you would rather avoid the extra latency and token burn of a reasoning model.
Qwen3.7 Plus is clearly ahead on the provisional aggregate, 87 to 76. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
Qwen3.7 Plus's sharpest advantage is in reasoning, where it averages 91.7 against 64.4. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is IFBench, 58% to 79.1%. Claude Opus 4.5 does hit back in multilingual, so the answer changes if that is the part of the workload you care about most.
Qwen3.7 Plus 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 Plus gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 200K for Claude Opus 4.5.
Qwen3.7 Plus is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 87 to 76. The biggest single separator in this matchup is IFBench, where the scores are 58% and 79.1%.
Qwen3.7 Plus has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 67.9 versus 66.2. Inside this category, HLE is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Qwen3.7 Plus has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 71.1 versus 65.9. Inside this category, SWE-bench Verified is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Qwen3.7 Plus has the edge for reasoning in this comparison, averaging 91.7 versus 64.4. Inside this category, CritPt is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Qwen3.7 Plus has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 71.7 versus 62.5. Inside this category, DeepPlanning is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Qwen3.7 Plus has the edge for multimodal and grounded tasks in this comparison, averaging 81.1 versus 70. Inside this category, ScreenSpot Pro is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Qwen3.7 Plus has the edge for instruction following in this comparison, averaging 89.2 versus 79.4. Inside this category, IFBench is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Claude Opus 4.5 has the edge for multilingual tasks in this comparison, averaging 85.7 versus 85.4. Inside this category, NOVA-63 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
For engineers, researchers, and the plain curious — a weekly brief on new models, ranking shifts, and pricing changes.
Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.