Skip to main content

Model comparison

Claude Opus 4.7 vs Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 4 shared benchmark results across 2 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

71.63/100
Margin
37.1pts
← winning
0 category wins0 category wins

BenchAlign evidence: Claude Opus 4.7 supported; Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct supported. Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. Claude Opus 4.7 and Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct share 4 comparable benchmark results. 0 of 8 categories are comparable. 18 results are unique to Claude Opus 4.7; 0 to Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct.

Updated July 15, 2026
Shared results
4
Claude Opus 4.7 only
18
Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct only
0
Comparable categories
0 / 8

Benchmark data for Claude Opus 4.7 and Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct is coming soon on BenchLM.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 4 shared benchmark results across 2 evidence categories; 0 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.

Why this result

BenchLM has partial data for these models, but not enough overlapping benchmark coverage to produce a fair score-level comparison yet.

Claude Opus 4.7 is priced at $5.00 input / $25.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.00 input / $0.00 output per 1M tokens for Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct. Claude Opus 4.7 has the larger context window at 1M, compared with 128K for Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct.

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 4.7 and Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct
CategoryClaude Opus 4.7ΔQwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct
MathClaude Opus 4.738.6MarginNo overlapQwen2.5 Coder 32B InstructNot measured

Operational comparison

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

MetricClaude Opus 4.7Qwen2.5 Coder 32B InstructComparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensClaude Opus 4.7$5 input / $25 outputQwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct$0 input / $0 outputQwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct has the lower combined listed price.
Generation speedtokens per secondClaude Opus 4.7Not availableQwen2.5 Coder 32B InstructNot availableA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenClaude Opus 4.7Not availableQwen2.5 Coder 32B InstructNot availableA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensClaude Opus 4.71MQwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct128KClaude Opus 4.7 lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

Agentic
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Qwen2.5 Coder 32B InstructResult
τ²-bench resultsSource 74%Not comparable
Gert LabsSource 65.59%Not comparable
ResearchClawBenchSource 20.7%Not comparable
OSWorld 2.0Source 13.9%Not comparable
Coding
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Qwen2.5 Coder 32B InstructResult
Vibe Code BenchSource 71.00%Not comparable
React Native EvalsSource 82.8%Not comparable
Terminal-Bench HardSource 54.5%Not comparable
AA-SciCodeSource 50.1%27.1%Claude Opus 4.7 leads
FrontierCodeSource 38.5%Not comparable
Reasoning
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Qwen2.5 Coder 32B InstructResult
AA-LCRSource 67.0%Not comparable
CritPtSource 5.1%Not comparable
Knowledge
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Qwen2.5 Coder 32B InstructResult
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 42.7%7.1%Claude Opus 4.7 leads
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 88.5%41.7%Claude Opus 4.7 leads
AA-HLESource 31.2%3.8%Claude Opus 4.7 leads
AA-Omniscience IndexSource 14.2%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 43.5%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 51.9%Not comparable
Math
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Qwen2.5 Coder 32B InstructResult
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)Source 43.793%Not comparable
FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)Source 22.917%Not comparable
Multimodal
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Qwen2.5 Coder 32B InstructResult
AA-MMMU-ProSource 76.4%Not comparable
Design Arena WebsiteSource 1328Not comparable
Inst. Following
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Qwen2.5 Coder 32B InstructResult
AA-IFBenchSource 43.6%Not comparable
Frequently Asked Questions (3)

Can I compare Claude Opus 4.7 and Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct on BenchLM yet?

Not fully yet. BenchLM is tracking both models, but the sourced benchmark breakdown for this comparison is still coming soon.

Why does this comparison show “coming soon”?

BenchLM only shows category winners and benchmark-level calls when we have sourced results that can be compared fairly. For these models, the public benchmark coverage is not complete enough yet.

What data is available for Claude Opus 4.7 and Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct today?

Claude Opus 4.7: $5.00 input / $25.00 output per 1M tokens Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct: $0.00 input / $0.00 output per 1M tokens Both model pages still include creator, context window, reasoning mode, and other metadata while benchmark coverage fills in.

Related Comparisons

Last updated: July 15, 2026

The AI models change fast. We track them for you.

A weekly brief for engineers and researchers covering new models, ranking shifts, and pricing changes.

Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.