Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Claude Opus 4.1 vs Qwen2.5 72B Instruct

Claude Opus 4.1 leads Qwen2.5 72B Instruct on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 22.8 to 7.7, and Qwen2.5 72B Instruct costs 187.5x less per output token ($0.40 vs $75.00 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 35 benchmarks have a result for both.

Claude Opus 4.1Anthropic
Coding
No data
Overall
50.2
Output $/M
$75.00
35
Qwen2.5 72B InstructQwen
Coding
No data
Overall
26.5
Output $/M
$0.40
0
vs boards won of 35 shared

Claude Opus 4.1 or Qwen2.5 72B Instruct: which to pick

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick Claude Opus 4.1 for a larger context window (200K against 33K tokens).

Shared results
35
Claude Opus 4.1 only
38
Qwen2.5 72B Instruct only
18
Like-for-like categories
7 of 9

Only benchmarks that tested both models count toward a pick; a result only one model has is shown but not compared.

Which one for your work

Each card is decided by one number both models carry. Where only one has it, the card says so and makes no call.

At a glance

Coding index
Claude Opus 4.1 not benchmarked, Qwen2.5 72B Instruct not benchmarked.
Widest category
Math, 36.5 points apart on average over 3 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
OTIS Mock AIME: Claude Opus 4.1 68.9% against Qwen2.5 72B Instruct 8.1%, 60.8 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Claude Opus 4.1 $75.00 against Qwen2.5 72B Instruct $0.40 per million output tokens, 187.5x apart.
Context window
Claude Opus 4.1 takes 200K tokens, Qwen2.5 72B Instruct 33K.

Benchmark by benchmark

First the score: boards each model leads, per category, where both have a result. Then every board, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale, so compare the two in a row, not one row with another.

Boards won, where both have a result
CategoryClaude Opus 4.1BarsQwen2.5 72B InstructTies
Coding30
Intelligence20
Agentic work10
Reasoning40
Math30
Knowledge40
General180
All shared boards350
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index30
Coding benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.1 and Qwen2.5 72B Instruct
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Qwen2.5 72B InstructLeader
LMArena WebDev1390Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)66.5%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured27.6%Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured4.5%Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
Terminal-Bench38.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
WeirdML45.9%16.0%Claude Opus 4.1
Cybench42.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LMArena Text: coding14791292Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: software and IT14561292Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena WebDev: HTML1399Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
SciCode4.6%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 28 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
Intelligence benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.1 and Qwen2.5 72B Instruct
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Qwen2.5 72B InstructLeader
AA Intelligence Index22.87.7Claude Opus 4.1
Epoch Capabilities Index144.1129.0Claude Opus 4.1
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Agentic work benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.1 and Qwen2.5 72B Instruct
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Qwen2.5 72B InstructLeader
τ²-Bench TelecomNot measured34.5%Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
METR time horizons66.8%35.8%Claude Opus 4.1
GDPval43.6%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
BALROGNot measured16.2%Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
DeepResearch Bench48.3%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
TheAgentCompanyNot measured5.7%Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
Neither model has a result on the other 35 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index40
Reasoning benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.1 and Qwen2.5 72B Instruct
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Qwen2.5 72B InstructLeader
GPQA Diamond76.3%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
MMMU Pro (Vals AI)77.5%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured49.1%Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured3.6%Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)77.3%49.1%Claude Opus 4.1
SimpleBench60.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
Mystery game puzzles21.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
EBR-bench7.9%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
VPCT35.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
BIG-Bench HardNot measured79.8%Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts14421271Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: expert14381245Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English14511279Claude Opus 4.1
Neither model has a result on the other 9 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index30
Math benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.1 and Qwen2.5 72B Instruct
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Qwen2.5 72B InstructLeader
AIME78.2%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
MATH 500 (Vals AI)95.4%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
MGSM (Vals AI)94.4%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
AA Math IndexNot measured14.0Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured14.0%Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
OTIS Mock AIME68.9%8.1%Claude Opus 4.1
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 312.6%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
FrontierMath, tier 42.4%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
MATH level 5Not measured63.2%Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: math14311283Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: mathematical work14341290Claude Opus 4.1
Neither model has a result on the other 2 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index40
Knowledge benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.1 and Qwen2.5 72B Instruct
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Qwen2.5 72B InstructLeader
MMLU Pro87.9%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LegalBench (Vals AI)83.5%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
TaxEval (Vals AI)73.7%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
MortgageTax (Vals AI)61.1%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
MedQA (Vals AI)93.6%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
MedCode (Vals AI)47.2%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured72.0%Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
MMLUNot measured85.3%Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
AI2 Reasoning ChallengeNot measured94.5%Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: science14221275Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare14161258Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: legal and government14211288Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: business and finance14061253Claude Opus 4.1
FACTS Benchmark Suite40.4%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 4 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index8 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.1 and Qwen2.5 72B Instruct
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Qwen2.5 72B InstructLeader
Design Arena: websites1176Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
Design Arena: UI components1162Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
Design Arena: game dev1171Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
Design Arena: data viz1166Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
Design Arena: 3D1152Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
Design Arena: all code categories1170Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
Design Arena: SVG1152Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
Design Arena: ASCII art1167Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index180
General benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.1 and Qwen2.5 72B Instruct
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Qwen2.5 72B InstructLeader
SAGE (Vals AI)31.4%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
MedScribe (Vals AI)73.9%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
IFBenchNot measured36.9%Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
DTBench80.0%62.9%Claude Opus 4.1
LMCA37.1%13.4%Claude Opus 4.1
Creative writing (Lech Mazur)84.7%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
HellaSwagNot measured84.8%Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
WinoGrandeNot measured82.3%Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
PIQANot measured82.6%Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
LMArena Text14191269Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: instruction following14351254Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: creative writing14121221Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: English14331283Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: non-English14051252Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: Chinese14271273Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: German14131234Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: Japanese13771180Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: Korean13811188Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: French14331280Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: Spanish14481255Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: Russian14221264Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: Polish1413Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn14441272Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: longer queries14551281Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: writing and language14181247Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: entertainment and media13981211Claude Opus 4.1
Neither model has a result on the other 20 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.1 and Qwen2.5 72B Instruct
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Qwen2.5 72B InstructLeader
Neither model has a result on 5 boards here

What each workload costs

Three fixed token mixes at each model's listed price, so per-token rates become a bill.

Chat turn

1K input + 500 output tokens

Claude Opus 4.1$0.052Fits in one request
Qwen2.5 72B Instruct$0.0006Fits in one request

Qwen2.5 72B Instruct costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Claude Opus 4.1$0.975Fits in one request
Qwen2.5 72B Instruct$0.019Exceeds the context window

Qwen2.5 72B Instruct costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Claude Opus 4.1$3.75Exceeds the context window
Qwen2.5 72B Instruct$0.076Exceeds the context window

Qwen2.5 72B Instruct costs less

Listed OpenRouter rates, without cache or batch discounts. A workload that does not fit a model's context window would need splitting.

Specification differences

The leading value in a row is marked; a row with a missing value names no leader. Our two rows are marked in red.

Specifications of Claude Opus 4.1 and Qwen2.5 72B Instruct
SpecificationAnthropic Claude Opus 4.1Qwen2.5 72B Instruct
MakerAnthropicQwen
WeightsNo public weights listedOpen weights
ReleasedAugust 5, 2025September 19, 2024
Context window200K33K
Input $/Mtok$15.00$0.36
Output $/Mtok$75.00$0.40
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it10
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Claude Opus 4.1 better than Qwen2.5 72B Instruct for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Claude Opus 4.1 for a larger context window (200K against 33K tokens).

Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.1 or Qwen2.5 72B Instruct?

Claude Opus 4.1 costs $15.00 per million input tokens and $75.00 per million output tokens; Qwen2.5 72B Instruct costs $0.36 and $0.40. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, Claude Opus 4.1 or Qwen2.5 72B Instruct?

Claude Opus 4.1, with 200K tokens against 33K.

How many benchmarks is the Claude Opus 4.1 vs Qwen2.5 72B Instruct comparison based on?

35 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. Claude Opus 4.1's coding index rests on 1 independent benchmark and Qwen2.5 72B Instruct's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next