Claude Opus 4 vs Qwen 2.5 72B
Side-by-side benchmark comparison across coding, math, reasoning, speed, and pricing.
Claude Opus 4 by Anthropic wins on 10 of 14 benchmarks against Qwen 2.5 72B by Qwen, which leads on 4. This head-to-head comparison covers coding, math, reasoning, speed, and pricing metrics from our benchmark data.
Category-by-Category Breakdown
General Intelligence: In general intelligence, Claude Opus 4 scores 1375 on Chatbot Arena ELO compared to Qwen 2.5 72B's 1230, while Claude Opus 4 scores 83.0% on MMLU-Pro compared to Qwen 2.5 72B's 72.0%.
Coding: In coding, Claude Opus 4 scores 90.0% on HumanEval+ compared to Qwen 2.5 72B's 80.0%, while Claude Opus 4 scores 72.5% on SWE-bench Verified compared to Qwen 2.5 72B's 28.0%, while Claude Opus 4 scores 60.0% on LiveCodeBench compared to Qwen 2.5 72B's 55.5%.
Math: In math, Claude Opus 4 scores 86.0% on MATH compared to Qwen 2.5 72B's 83.1%, while Claude Opus 4 scores 95.0% on GSM8K compared to Qwen 2.5 72B's 91.0%.
Reasoning: In reasoning, Claude Opus 4 scores 79.6% on GPQA Diamond compared to Qwen 2.5 72B's 49.1%, while Claude Opus 4 scores 45.0% on ARC-AGI compared to Qwen 2.5 72B's 12.0%.
Context: In context, Claude Opus 4 scores 200K on Context Length compared to Qwen 2.5 72B's 33K.
Pricing Comparison
Claude Opus 4 costs $15.0/1M input tokens and $75.0/1M output tokens, while Qwen 2.5 72B costs $0.36/1M input and $0.40/1M output. Qwen 2.5 72B is the more affordable option for API usage.
Speed Comparison
Claude Opus 4 generates output at 50 tok/s compared to Qwen 2.5 72B's 80 tok/s, and the time to first token is 550 ms for Claude Opus 4 versus 350 ms for Qwen 2.5 72B. Qwen 2.5 72B delivers faster throughput.
Verdict
For developers prioritizing coding and general intelligence and math, Claude Opus 4 has the edge. For those who value affordability and speed, Qwen 2.5 72B is the stronger choice.
View Individual Model Pages
Claude Opus 4 vs Qwen 2.5 72B — FAQ
Which is better, Claude Opus 4 or Qwen 2.5 72B?
Claude Opus 4 wins on more benchmarks overall (10 vs 4). However, the best choice depends on your specific needs — each model excels in different areas.
How does Claude Opus 4 compare to Qwen 2.5 72B for coding?
Claude Opus 4 is better for coding, scoring 72.5% on SWE-bench Verified compared to 28.0%. SWE-bench tests real-world software engineering by resolving actual GitHub issues.
Is Claude Opus 4 cheaper than Qwen 2.5 72B?
Yes, Qwen 2.5 72B is cheaper. Claude Opus 4 costs $15.0/1M input and $75.0/1M output tokens. Qwen 2.5 72B costs $0.36/1M input and $0.40/1M output tokens.
Which is faster, Claude Opus 4 or Qwen 2.5 72B?
Qwen 2.5 72B is faster, generating output at 80 tok/s compared to 50 tok/s. Faster output speed means shorter wait times for API responses.
What benchmarks does the Claude Opus 4 vs Qwen 2.5 72B comparison cover?
This comparison covers 14 benchmarks including Chatbot Arena ELO, MMLU-Pro, HumanEval+, MATH, SWE-bench Verified, GPQA Diamond, Output Speed, Time to First Token, and more. Metrics span general intelligence, coding, math, reasoning, speed, and cost categories.