Model comparison
Claude Opus 4.5 vs Qwen3.5 397B
Head-to-head evidence from 48 shared benchmark results across 8 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: Claude Opus 4.5 #34 (Supported); Qwen3.5 397B #71 (Estimated). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Claude Opus 4.5 and Qwen3.5 397B share 48 comparable benchmark results. 8 of 8 categories are comparable. 11 results are unique to Claude Opus 4.5; 7 to Qwen3.5 397B.
Updated July 22, 2026- Shared results
- 48
- Claude Opus 4.5 only
- 11
- Qwen3.5 397B only
- 7
- Comparable categories
- 8 / 8
Pick Claude Opus 4.5 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Qwen3.5 397B only becomes the better choice if mathematics is the priority or you want the cheaper token bill.
Why this result
Claude Opus 4.5 is clearly ahead on the BenchAlign aggregate, 64.22 to 57.01. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
Claude Opus 4.5's sharpest advantage is in agentic, where it averages 62.6 against 56.5. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is CharXiv, 68.5% to 80.8%. Qwen3.5 397B does hit back in mathematics, so the answer changes if that is the part of the workload you care about most.
Claude Opus 4.5 is also the more expensive model on tokens at $5.00 input / $25.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.60 input / $3.60 output per 1M tokens for Qwen3.5 397B. That is roughly 6.9x on output cost alone. Claude Opus 4.5 gives you the larger context window at 200K, compared with 128K for Qwen3.5 397B.
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 | Claude Opus 4.5 | Δ | Qwen3.5 397B |
|---|---|---|---|
| Math | Claude Opus 4.557.5 | Margin→ 33.1 | Qwen3.5 397B90.6 |
| Inst. Following | Claude Opus 4.569.5 | Margin→ 23.1 | Qwen3.5 397B92.6 |
| Multimodal | Claude Opus 4.569.9 | Margin→ 9.7 | Qwen3.5 397B79.6 |
| Agentic | Claude Opus 4.562.6 | Margin← 6.1 | Qwen3.5 397B56.5 |
| Coding | Claude Opus 4.571.7 | Margin← 5.2 | Qwen3.5 397B66.5 |
| Knowledge | Claude Opus 4.558.1 | Margin← 1.5 | Qwen3.5 397B56.6 |
| Reasoning | Claude Opus 4.564.4 | Margin← 1.2 | Qwen3.5 397B63.2 |
| Multilingual | Claude Opus 4.585.7 | Margin← 1.0 | Qwen3.5 397B84.7 |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
CharXiv
MultimodalA 68.5%B 80.8%Winner: Qwen3.5 397BΔ 12.3CharXiv: Claude Opus 4.5 scored 68.5%; Qwen3.5 397B scored 80.8%. Qwen3.5 397B wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
MMMU-Pro
MultimodalA 70.6%B 79%Winner: Qwen3.5 397BΔ 8.4MMMU-Pro: Claude Opus 4.5 scored 70.6%; Qwen3.5 397B scored 79%. Qwen3.5 397B wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
Terminal-Bench 2.0
AgenticA 59.3%B 52.5%Winner: Claude Opus 4.5Δ 6.8Terminal-Bench 2.0: Claude Opus 4.5 scored 59.3%; Qwen3.5 397B scored 52.5%. Claude Opus 4.5 wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
SWE-bench Pro
CodingA 57.1%B 50.9%Winner: Claude Opus 4.5Δ 6.2SWE-bench Pro: Claude Opus 4.5 scored 57.1%; Qwen3.5 397B scored 50.9%. Claude Opus 4.5 wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
SWE-bench Verified
CodingA 80.9%B 76.2%Winner: Claude Opus 4.5Δ 4.7SWE-bench Verified: Claude Opus 4.5 scored 80.9%; Qwen3.5 397B scored 76.2%. Claude Opus 4.5 wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | Claude Opus 4.5 | Qwen3.5 397B | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Claude Opus 4.5$5 input / $25 output | Qwen3.5 397B$0.6 input / $3.6 output | Qwen3.5 397B has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Claude Opus 4.546 tok/s | Qwen3.5 397B96 tok/s | Qwen3.5 397B has the higher measured throughput. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Claude Opus 4.51.01 s | Qwen3.5 397B2.44 s | Claude Opus 4.5 reaches the first token sooner. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Claude Opus 4.5200K | Qwen3.5 397B128K | Claude Opus 4.5 lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
AgenticClaude Opus 4.5 wins22 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.5 | Qwen3.5 397B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 59.3% | 52.5% | Claude Opus 4.5 leads |
| OSWorld-VerifiedSource | 66.3% | — | Not comparable |
| OSWorldSource | 66.3% | — | Not comparable |
| Claw-EvalSource | 59.6% | 56.8% | Claude Opus 4.5 leads |
| QwenClawBenchSource | 52.3% | 51.8% | Claude Opus 4.5 leads |
| τ³-bench resultsSource | 70.2% | 68.4% | Claude Opus 4.5 leads |
| VITA-BenchSource | 23.3% | 43.7% | Qwen3.5 397B leads |
| DeepPlanningSource | 26.4% | 37.6% | Qwen3.5 397B leads |
| ToolathlonSource | 43.5% | 36.3% | Claude Opus 4.5 leads |
| MCP AtlasSource | 42.3% | 46.1% | Qwen3.5 397B leads |
| MCP-TasksSource | 71.8% | 74.2% | Qwen3.5 397B leads |
| WideResearchSource | 76.4% | 74.0% | Claude Opus 4.5 leads |
| CyberGymSource | 50.6% | — | Not comparable |
| τ²-bench resultsSource | 86.3% | 95.6% | Qwen3.5 397B leads |
| Gert LabsSource | 64.23% | 46.76% | Claude Opus 4.5 leads |
| JobBenchSource | 32.3% | — | Not comparable |
| BrowseCompSource | — | 62% | Not comparable |
| ResearchClawBenchSource | — | 14.2% | Not comparable |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | — | 19.9% | Not comparable |
| APEX-Agents-AASource | — | 15.3% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 23.1% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 962 | Not comparable |
CodingClaude Opus 4.5 wins7 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.5 | Qwen3.5 397B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench VerifiedSource | 80.9% | 76.2% | Claude Opus 4.5 leads |
| LiveCodeBench v6Source | 84.8% | 83.6% | Claude Opus 4.5 leads |
| SWE-bench ProSource | 57.1% | 50.9% | Claude Opus 4.5 leads |
| SWE MultilingualSource | 77.5% | — | Not comparable |
| NL2RepoSource | 43.2% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-SciCodeSource | 47.0% | 42.0% | Claude Opus 4.5 leads |
| AA Coding IndexSource | — | 48.2% | Not comparable |
ReasoningClaude Opus 4.5 wins4 benchmarks
KnowledgeClaude Opus 4.5 wins13 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.5 | Qwen3.5 397B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQASource | 87% | 88.4% | Qwen3.5 397B leads |
| SuperGPQASource | 70.6% | 70.4% | Claude Opus 4.5 leads |
| MMLU-ProSource | 89.5% | 87.8% | Claude Opus 4.5 leads |
| MMLU-ReduxSource | 96.6% | 94.9% | Claude Opus 4.5 leads |
| C-EvalSource | 92.2% | 93% | Qwen3.5 397B leads |
| HLESource | 30.8% | 28.7% | Claude Opus 4.5 leads |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 34.7% | 33.7% | Claude Opus 4.5 leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 81.0% | 89.3% | Qwen3.5 397B leads |
| AA-HLESource | 12.9% | 27.3% | Qwen3.5 397B leads |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | -3.9% | -29.8% | Claude Opus 4.5 leads |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 40.7% | 31.4% | Claude Opus 4.5 leads |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 75.4% | 89.1% | Claude Opus 4.5 leads |
| AA MMLU-ProSource | 88.9% | — | Not comparable |
MathQwen3.5 397B wins7 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.5 | Qwen3.5 397B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AIME26Source | 95.1% | 93.3% | Claude Opus 4.5 leads |
| HMMT Feb 2025Source | 92.9% | 94.8% | Qwen3.5 397B leads |
| HMMT Nov 2025Source | 93.3% | 92.7% | Claude Opus 4.5 leads |
| HMMT Feb 2026Source | 85.3% | 87.9% | Qwen3.5 397B leads |
| MMAnswerBenchSource | 84.0% | 80.9% | Claude Opus 4.5 leads |
| FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)Source | 20.690% | — | Not comparable |
| FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)Source | 4.167% | — | Not comparable |
MultilingualClaude Opus 4.5 wins2 benchmarks
MultimodalQwen3.5 397B wins8 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.5 | Qwen3.5 397B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMMU-ProSource | 70.6% | 79% | Qwen3.5 397B leads |
| MathVisionSource | 74.3% | 88.6% | Qwen3.5 397B leads |
| CharXivSource | 68.5% | 80.8% | Qwen3.5 397B leads |
| VideoMMMUSource | 84.4% | 84.7% | Qwen3.5 397B leads |
| ScreenSpot ProSource | 45.7% | 65.6% | Qwen3.5 397B leads |
| V*Source | 67.0% | 95.8% | Qwen3.5 397B leads |
| AA-MMMU-ProSource | 71.2% | 77.3% | Qwen3.5 397B leads |
| Design Arena WebsiteSource | 1277 | — | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (9)
Which is better, Claude Opus 4.5 or Qwen3.5 397B?
Claude Opus 4.5 is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 64.22 to 57.01. The biggest single separator in this matchup is CharXiv, where the scores are 68.5% and 80.8%.
Which is better for knowledge tasks, Claude Opus 4.5 or Qwen3.5 397B?
Claude Opus 4.5 has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 58.1 versus 56.6. Inside this category, AA-Omniscience Index is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for coding, Claude Opus 4.5 or Qwen3.5 397B?
Claude Opus 4.5 has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 71.7 versus 66.5. Inside this category, SWE-bench Pro is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for math, Claude Opus 4.5 or Qwen3.5 397B?
Qwen3.5 397B has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 90.6 versus 57.5. Inside this category, MMAnswerBench is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for reasoning, Claude Opus 4.5 or Qwen3.5 397B?
Claude Opus 4.5 has the edge for reasoning in this comparison, averaging 64.4 versus 63.2. Inside this category, AI-Needle is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for agentic tasks, Claude Opus 4.5 or Qwen3.5 397B?
Claude Opus 4.5 has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 62.6 versus 56.5. Inside this category, VITA-Bench is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for multimodal and grounded tasks, Claude Opus 4.5 or Qwen3.5 397B?
Qwen3.5 397B has the edge for multimodal and grounded tasks in this comparison, averaging 79.6 versus 69.9. Inside this category, V* is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for instruction following, Claude Opus 4.5 or Qwen3.5 397B?
Qwen3.5 397B has the edge for instruction following in this comparison, averaging 92.6 versus 69.5. Inside this category, AA-IFBench is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for multilingual tasks, Claude Opus 4.5 or Qwen3.5 397B?
Claude Opus 4.5 has the edge for multilingual tasks in this comparison, averaging 85.7 versus 84.7. Inside this category, NOVA-63 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Related Comparisons
Choose a model with this week’s evidence
Join 2,000+ readers for ranking moves, pricing changes, and the claims that still need proof.
One email each week. Unsubscribe anytime.