Skip to main content
BenchLM
Advertise

Model comparison

Claude Sonnet 4.6 vs Qwen3 235B 2507

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 3 shared benchmark results across 1 category. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

65.07/100
Margin
9.0pts
← winning
56.02/100
0 category wins1 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: Claude Sonnet 4.6 #32 (Supported); Qwen3 235B 2507 #78 (Estimated). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. Claude Sonnet 4.6 and Qwen3 235B 2507 share 3 comparable benchmark results. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 30 results are unique to Claude Sonnet 4.6; 1 to Qwen3 235B 2507.

Updated July 20, 2026
Shared results
3
Claude Sonnet 4.6 only
30
Qwen3 235B 2507 only
1
Comparable categories
1 / 8

Pick Claude Sonnet 4.6 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Qwen3 235B 2507 only becomes the better choice if knowledge is the priority or you want the cheaper token bill.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 3 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

Claude Sonnet 4.6 is clearly ahead on the BenchAlign aggregate, 65.07 to 56.02. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.

Claude Sonnet 4.6 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 4.6 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 4.6 and Qwen3 235B 2507
CategoryClaude Sonnet 4.6ΔQwen3 235B 2507
KnowledgeClaude Sonnet 4.666.0Margin→ 12.9Qwen3 235B 250778.9
AgenticClaude Sonnet 4.665.2MarginNo overlapQwen3 235B 2507Not measured
CodingClaude Sonnet 4.669.1MarginNo overlapQwen3 235B 2507Not measured
MathClaude Sonnet 4.626.4MarginNo overlapQwen3 235B 2507Not measured
MultilingualClaude Sonnet 4.6Not measuredMarginNo overlapQwen3 235B 250779.4
MultimodalClaude Sonnet 4.677.4MarginNo overlapQwen3 235B 2507Not measured

Decisive benchmark drivers

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

More
A · Claude Sonnet 4.6B · Qwen3 235B 2507

  1. SuperGPQA

    Knowledge
    Source ↗
    A 95%B 62.6%
    Winner: Claude Sonnet 4.6Δ 32.4
    SuperGPQA: Claude Sonnet 4.6 scored 95%; Qwen3 235B 2507 scored 62.6%. Claude Sonnet 4.6 wins this benchmark.

  2. GPQA

    Knowledge
    Source ↗
    A 89.9%B 77.5%
    Winner: Claude Sonnet 4.6Δ 12.4
    GPQA: Claude Sonnet 4.6 scored 89.9%; Qwen3 235B 2507 scored 77.5%. Claude Sonnet 4.6 wins this benchmark.

  3. MMLU-Pro

    Knowledge
    Source ↗
    A 79.2%B 83%
    Winner: Qwen3 235B 2507Δ 3.8
    MMLU-Pro: Claude Sonnet 4.6 scored 79.2%; Qwen3 235B 2507 scored 83%. Qwen3 235B 2507 wins this benchmark.

Operational comparison

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

MetricClaude Sonnet 4.6Qwen3 235B 2507Comparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensClaude Sonnet 4.6$3 input / $15 outputQwen3 235B 2507$0 input / $0 outputQwen3 235B 2507 has the lower combined listed price.
Generation speedtokens per secondClaude Sonnet 4.644 tok/sQwen3 235B 2507Not availableA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenClaude Sonnet 4.61.48 sQwen3 235B 2507Not availableA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensClaude Sonnet 4.6200KQwen3 235B 2507128KClaude Sonnet 4.6 lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

Agentic
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.6Qwen3 235B 2507Result
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 59.1%—Not comparable
OSWorld-VerifiedSource 72.1%—Not comparable
Claw-EvalSource 67.8%—Not comparable
CyberGymSource 65.2%—Not comparable
τ²-bench resultsSource 79.5%—Not comparable
Gert LabsSource 62.92%—Not comparable
OSWorld 2.0Source 8.3%—Not comparable
JobBenchSource 36.9%—Not comparable
Coding
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.6Qwen3 235B 2507Result
SWE-bench VerifiedSource 79.6%—Not comparable
SWE-RebenchSource 60.7%—Not comparable
React Native EvalsSource 80.6%—Not comparable
Vibe Code BenchSource 51.48%—Not comparable
cursorBench31Source 48.8%—Not comparable
AA-SciCodeSource 46.9%—Not comparable
FrontierCode 1.1 MainSource 24.3%—Not comparable
Reasoning
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.6Qwen3 235B 2507Result
AA-LCRSource 57.7%—Not comparable
CritPtSource 0.9%—Not comparable
KnowledgeQwen3 235B 2507 wins
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.6Qwen3 235B 2507Result
GPQASource 89.9%77.5%Claude Sonnet 4.6 leads
SuperGPQASource 95%62.6%Claude Sonnet 4.6 leads
MMLU-ProSource 79.2%83%Qwen3 235B 2507 leads
HLESource 49%—Not comparable
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 35.9%—Not comparable
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 79.9%—Not comparable
AA-HLESource 13.2%—Not comparable
AA-Omniscience IndexSource -2.9%—Not comparable
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 38.0%—Not comparable
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 65.9%—Not comparable
Math
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.6Qwen3 235B 2507Result
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)Source 32.400%—Not comparable
FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)Source 8.300%—Not comparable
Multilingual
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.6Qwen3 235B 2507Result
MMLU-ProXSource —79.4%Not comparable
Multimodal
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.6Qwen3 235B 2507Result
CharXivSource 77.4%—Not comparable
AA-MMMU-ProSource 70.6%—Not comparable
Design Arena WebsiteSource 1317—Not comparable
Inst. Following
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.6Qwen3 235B 2507Result
AA-IFBenchSource 41.2%—Not comparable
Frequently Asked Questions (2)

Which is better, Claude Sonnet 4.6 or Qwen3 235B 2507?

Claude Sonnet 4.6 is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 65.07 to 56.02. The biggest single separator in this matchup is SuperGPQA, where the scores are 95% and 62.6%.

Which is better for knowledge tasks, Claude Sonnet 4.6 or Qwen3 235B 2507?

Qwen3 235B 2507 has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 78.9 versus 66. Inside this category, SuperGPQA 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 20, 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.