Skip to main content
BenchLM
Advertise

Model comparison

Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs Qwen3 235B 2507

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 1 shared benchmark result across 1 category. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

53.61/100
Margin
2.4pts
winning →
56.02/100
1 category wins0 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: Claude Sonnet 4.5 #96 (Estimated); Qwen3 235B 2507 #78 (Estimated). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. Claude Sonnet 4.5 and Qwen3 235B 2507 share 1 comparable benchmark result. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 11 results are unique to Claude Sonnet 4.5; 3 to Qwen3 235B 2507.

Updated July 22, 2026
Shared results
1
Claude Sonnet 4.5 only
11
Qwen3 235B 2507 only
3
Comparable categories
1 / 8

Pick Qwen3 235B 2507 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Claude Sonnet 4.5 only becomes the better choice if knowledge is the priority or you need the larger 200K context window.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 1 shared benchmark result across 1 evidence category; 1 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.

Why this result

Qwen3 235B 2507 has the cleaner BenchAlign overall profile here, landing at 56.02 versus 53.61. It is a real lead, but still close enough that category-level strengths matter more than the headline number.

Claude Sonnet 4.5 is also the more expensive model on tokens at $3.00 input / $15.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.00 input / $0.00 output per 1M tokens for Qwen3 235B 2507. That is roughly Infinityx on output cost alone. Claude Sonnet 4.5 gives you the larger context window at 200K, compared with 128K for Qwen3 235B 2507.

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 Sonnet 4.5 and Qwen3 235B 2507
CategoryClaude Sonnet 4.5ΔQwen3 235B 2507
KnowledgeClaude Sonnet 4.583.4Margin← 4.5Qwen3 235B 250778.9
AgenticClaude Sonnet 4.555.4MarginNo overlapQwen3 235B 2507Not measured
CodingClaude Sonnet 4.577.2MarginNo overlapQwen3 235B 2507Not measured
ReasoningClaude Sonnet 4.513.6MarginNo overlapQwen3 235B 2507Not measured
MathClaude Sonnet 4.511.2MarginNo overlapQwen3 235B 2507Not measured
MultilingualClaude Sonnet 4.5Not measuredMarginNo overlapQwen3 235B 250779.4

Decisive benchmark drivers

The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.

More
A · Claude Sonnet 4.5B · Qwen3 235B 2507

  1. GPQA

    Knowledge
    Source ↗
    A 83.4%B 77.5%
    Winner: Claude Sonnet 4.5Δ 5.9
    GPQA: Claude Sonnet 4.5 scored 83.4%; Qwen3 235B 2507 scored 77.5%. Claude Sonnet 4.5 wins this benchmark.

Operational comparison

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

MetricClaude Sonnet 4.5Qwen3 235B 2507Comparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensClaude Sonnet 4.5$3 input / $15 outputQwen3 235B 2507$0 input / $0 outputQwen3 235B 2507 has the lower combined listed price.
Generation speedtokens per secondClaude Sonnet 4.5Not availableQwen3 235B 2507Not availableA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenClaude Sonnet 4.5Not availableQwen3 235B 2507Not availableA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensClaude Sonnet 4.5200KQwen3 235B 2507128KClaude Sonnet 4.5 lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

Agentic
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.5Qwen3 235B 2507Result
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 50%—Not comparable
OSWorld-VerifiedSource 61.4%—Not comparable
VITA-BenchSource 17.0%—Not comparable
Gert LabsSource 48.51%—Not comparable
JobBenchSource 27.7%—Not comparable
Coding
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.5Qwen3 235B 2507Result
SWE-bench VerifiedSource 77.2%—Not comparable
Reasoning
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.5Qwen3 235B 2507Result
ARC-AGI-2Source 13.6%—Not comparable
KnowledgeClaude Sonnet 4.5 wins
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.5Qwen3 235B 2507Result
GPQASource 83.4%77.5%Claude Sonnet 4.5 leads
SuperGPQASource —62.6%Not comparable
MMLU-ProSource —83%Not comparable
Math
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.5Qwen3 235B 2507Result
AIME 2025Source 87%—Not comparable
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)Source 13.495%—Not comparable
FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)Source 4.167%—Not comparable
Multilingual
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.5Qwen3 235B 2507Result
MMLU-ProXSource —79.4%Not comparable
Multimodal
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.5Qwen3 235B 2507Result
Design Arena WebsiteSource 1219—Not comparable
Frequently Asked Questions (2)

Which is better, Claude Sonnet 4.5 or Qwen3 235B 2507?

Qwen3 235B 2507 is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 56.02 to 53.61. The biggest single separator in this matchup is GPQA, where the scores are 83.4% and 77.5%.

Which is better for knowledge tasks, Claude Sonnet 4.5 or Qwen3 235B 2507?

Claude Sonnet 4.5 has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 83.4 versus 78.9. Inside this category, GPQA is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Related Comparisons

Explore More

Anthropic Compare Pricing Methodology Find Your Best LLM Overall Rankings
Last updated: July 22, 2026

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.