Model Comparison

Claude 3 Opus vs Qwen2.5 14B Instruct

Claude 3 Opus significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Want to compare interactively?Try the playground

Performance Benchmarks

Comparative analysis across standard metrics

7 benchmarks

Claude 3 Opus outperforms in 6 benchmarks (ARC-C, GPQA, GSM8k, HumanEval, MMLU, MMLU-Pro), while Qwen2.5 14B Instruct is better at 1 benchmark (MATH).

Claude 3 Opus significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Fri May 15 2026 • llm-stats.com

Arena Performance

Human preference votes

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Only Claude 3 Opus specifies input context (200,000 tokens). Only Claude 3 Opus specifies output context (200,000 tokens).

Claude 3 Opus

Input200,000 tokens

Output200,000 tokens

Qwen2.5 14B Instruct

Input- tokens

Output- tokens

Fri May 15 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input Capabilities

Supported data types and modalities

Claude 3 Opus supports multimodal inputs, whereas Qwen2.5 14B Instruct does not.

Claude 3 Opus can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.

Claude 3 Opus

Text

Images

Audio

Video

Qwen2.5 14B Instruct

Text

Images

Audio

Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Claude 3 Opus is licensed under a proprietary license, while Qwen2.5 14B Instruct uses Apache 2.0.

License differences may affect how you can use these models in commercial or open-source projects.

Claude 3 Opus

Proprietary

Closed source

Qwen2.5 14B Instruct

Apache 2.0

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Claude 3 Opus was released on 2024-02-29, while Qwen2.5 14B Instruct was released on 2024-09-19.

Qwen2.5 14B Instruct is 7 months newer than Claude 3 Opus.

Claude 3 Opus

Feb 29, 2024

2.2 years ago

Qwen2.5 14B Instruct

Sep 19, 2024

1.7 years ago

6mo newer

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Neither model specifies a knowledge cutoff date.

Unable to compare the recency of their training data.

No cutoff dates available

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion→

Key Takeaways

Claude 3 Opus

View details

Anthropic

Larger context window (200,000 tokens)

Supports multimodal inputs

Higher ARC-C score (96.4% vs 67.3%)

Higher GPQA score (50.4% vs 45.5%)

Higher GSM8k score (95.0% vs 94.8%)

Higher HumanEval score (84.9% vs 83.5%)

Higher MMLU score (86.8% vs 79.7%)

Higher MMLU-Pro score (68.5% vs 63.7%)

Qwen2.5 14B Instruct

View details

Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team

Has open weights

Higher MATH score (80.0% vs 60.1%)

Detailed Comparison

AI Model Comparison Table
Feature	Claude 3 Opus	Qwen2.5 14B Instruct

FAQ

Common questions about Claude 3 Opus vs Qwen2.5 14B Instruct.

Which is better, Claude 3 Opus or Qwen2.5 14B Instruct?

Claude 3 Opus significantly outperforms across most benchmarks. Claude 3 Opus is made by Anthropic and Qwen2.5 14B Instruct is made by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their benchmark scores, pricing, and capabilities above.

How does Claude 3 Opus compare to Qwen2.5 14B Instruct in benchmarks?

Claude 3 Opus scores ARC-C: 96.4%, HellaSwag: 95.4%, GSM8k: 95.0%, MGSM: 90.7%, BIG-Bench Hard: 86.8%. Qwen2.5 14B Instruct scores GSM8k: 94.8%, HumanEval: 83.5%, MBPP: 82.0%, MATH: 80.0%, MMLU-Redux: 80.0%.

What are the context window sizes for Claude 3 Opus and Qwen2.5 14B Instruct?

Claude 3 Opus supports 200K tokens and Qwen2.5 14B Instruct supports an unknown number of tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.

What are the main differences between Claude 3 Opus and Qwen2.5 14B Instruct?

Key differences include multimodal support (yes vs no), licensing (Proprietary vs Apache 2.0). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Claude 3 Opus and Qwen2.5 14B Instruct?

Claude 3 Opus is developed by Anthropic and Qwen2.5 14B Instruct is developed by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team.