Model comparison
Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs Qwen3 235B 2507 (Reasoning)
Head-to-head evidence from 2 shared benchmark results across 1 category. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: Claude Sonnet 4.5 #96 (Estimated); Qwen3 235B 2507 (Reasoning) #66 (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 (Reasoning) share 2 comparable benchmark results. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 10 results are unique to Claude Sonnet 4.5; 0 to Qwen3 235B 2507 (Reasoning).
Updated July 22, 2026- Shared results
- 2
- Claude Sonnet 4.5 only
- 10
- Qwen3 235B 2507 (Reasoning) only
- 0
- Comparable categories
- 1 / 8
Pick Qwen3 235B 2507 (Reasoning) if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Claude Sonnet 4.5 only becomes the better choice if mathematics is the priority or you need the larger 200K context window.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 2 shared benchmark results 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 (Reasoning) is clearly ahead on the BenchAlign aggregate, 58.01 to 53.61. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
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 (Reasoning). That is roughly Infinityx on output cost alone. Qwen3 235B 2507 (Reasoning) is the reasoning model in the pair, while Claude Sonnet 4.5 is not. That usually helps on harder chain-of-thought-heavy tests, but it can also mean more latency and more token spend in real use. Claude Sonnet 4.5 gives you the larger context window at 200K, compared with 128K for Qwen3 235B 2507 (Reasoning).
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 Sonnet 4.5 | Δ | Qwen3 235B 2507 (Reasoning) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Math | Claude Sonnet 4.511.2 | Margin← 4.8 | Qwen3 235B 2507 (Reasoning)6.4 |
| Agentic | Claude Sonnet 4.555.4 | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3 235B 2507 (Reasoning)Not measured |
| Coding | Claude Sonnet 4.577.2 | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3 235B 2507 (Reasoning)Not measured |
| Reasoning | Claude Sonnet 4.513.6 | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3 235B 2507 (Reasoning)Not measured |
| Knowledge | Claude Sonnet 4.583.4 | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3 235B 2507 (Reasoning)Not measured |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)
MathA 13.495%B 8.481%Winner: Claude Sonnet 4.5Δ 5FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3): Claude Sonnet 4.5 scored 13.495%; Qwen3 235B 2507 (Reasoning) scored 8.481%. Claude Sonnet 4.5 wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)
MathA 4.167%B 0.000%Winner: Claude Sonnet 4.5Δ 4.2FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4): Claude Sonnet 4.5 scored 4.167%; Qwen3 235B 2507 (Reasoning) scored 0.000%. Claude Sonnet 4.5 wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | Claude Sonnet 4.5 | Qwen3 235B 2507 (Reasoning) | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Claude Sonnet 4.5$3 input / $15 output | Qwen3 235B 2507 (Reasoning)$0 input / $0 output | Qwen3 235B 2507 (Reasoning) has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Claude Sonnet 4.5Not available | Qwen3 235B 2507 (Reasoning)Not available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Claude Sonnet 4.5Not available | Qwen3 235B 2507 (Reasoning)Not available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Claude Sonnet 4.5200K | Qwen3 235B 2507 (Reasoning)128K | Claude Sonnet 4.5 lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic5 benchmarks
Coding1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 4.5 | Qwen3 235B 2507 (Reasoning) | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench VerifiedSource | 77.2% | — | Not comparable |
Reasoning1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 4.5 | Qwen3 235B 2507 (Reasoning) | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| ARC-AGI-2Source | 13.6% | — | Not comparable |
Knowledge1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 4.5 | Qwen3 235B 2507 (Reasoning) | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQASource | 83.4% | — | Not comparable |
MathClaude Sonnet 4.5 wins3 benchmarks
Multimodal1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 4.5 | Qwen3 235B 2507 (Reasoning) | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena WebsiteSource | 1219 | — | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (2)
Which is better, Claude Sonnet 4.5 or Qwen3 235B 2507 (Reasoning)?
Qwen3 235B 2507 (Reasoning) is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 58.01 to 53.61. The biggest single separator in this matchup is FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3), where the scores are 13.495% and 8.481%.
Which is better for math, Claude Sonnet 4.5 or Qwen3 235B 2507 (Reasoning)?
Claude Sonnet 4.5 has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 11.2 versus 6.4. Inside this category, FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3) 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.