Model comparison
Claude Sonnet 4.6 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 4.6 #32 (Supported); Qwen3 235B 2507 (Reasoning) #66 (Estimated). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Claude Sonnet 4.6 and Qwen3 235B 2507 (Reasoning) share 2 comparable benchmark results. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 31 results are unique to Claude Sonnet 4.6; 0 to Qwen3 235B 2507 (Reasoning).
Updated July 20, 2026- Shared results
- 2
- Claude Sonnet 4.6 only
- 31
- Qwen3 235B 2507 (Reasoning) only
- 0
- Comparable categories
- 1 / 8
Pick Claude Sonnet 4.6 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Qwen3 235B 2507 (Reasoning) only becomes the better choice if you want the cheaper token bill or you want the stronger reasoning-first profile.
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
Claude Sonnet 4.6 is clearly ahead on the BenchAlign aggregate, 65.07 to 58.01. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
Claude Sonnet 4.6's sharpest advantage is in mathematics, where it averages 26.4 against 6.4. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3), 32.400% to 8.481%.
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 (Reasoning). That is roughly Infinityx on output cost alone. Qwen3 235B 2507 (Reasoning) is the reasoning model in the pair, while Claude Sonnet 4.6 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 4.6 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 4.6 | Δ | Qwen3 235B 2507 (Reasoning) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Math | Claude Sonnet 4.626.4 | Margin← 20.0 | Qwen3 235B 2507 (Reasoning)6.4 |
| Agentic | Claude Sonnet 4.665.2 | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3 235B 2507 (Reasoning)Not measured |
| Coding | Claude Sonnet 4.669.1 | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3 235B 2507 (Reasoning)Not measured |
| Knowledge | Claude Sonnet 4.666.0 | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3 235B 2507 (Reasoning)Not measured |
| Multimodal | Claude Sonnet 4.677.4 | 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 32.400%B 8.481%Winner: Claude Sonnet 4.6Δ 23.9FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3): Claude Sonnet 4.6 scored 32.400%; Qwen3 235B 2507 (Reasoning) scored 8.481%. Claude Sonnet 4.6 wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)
MathA 8.300%B 0.000%Winner: Claude Sonnet 4.6Δ 8.3FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4): Claude Sonnet 4.6 scored 8.300%; Qwen3 235B 2507 (Reasoning) scored 0.000%. Claude Sonnet 4.6 wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | Claude Sonnet 4.6 | Qwen3 235B 2507 (Reasoning) | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Claude Sonnet 4.6$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 4.644 tok/s | Qwen3 235B 2507 (Reasoning)Not available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Claude Sonnet 4.61.48 s | Qwen3 235B 2507 (Reasoning)Not available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Claude Sonnet 4.6200K | Qwen3 235B 2507 (Reasoning)128K | Claude Sonnet 4.6 lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic8 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 4.6 | Qwen3 235B 2507 (Reasoning) | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| 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 |
Coding7 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 4.6 | Qwen3 235B 2507 (Reasoning) | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| 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 |
Reasoning2 benchmarks
Knowledge10 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 4.6 | Qwen3 235B 2507 (Reasoning) | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQASource | 89.9% | — | Not comparable |
| SuperGPQASource | 95% | — | Not comparable |
| MMLU-ProSource | 79.2% | — | Not comparable |
| 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 |
MathClaude Sonnet 4.6 wins2 benchmarks
Multimodal3 benchmarks
Inst. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 4.6 | Qwen3 235B 2507 (Reasoning) | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-IFBenchSource | 41.2% | — | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (2)
Which is better, Claude Sonnet 4.6 or Qwen3 235B 2507 (Reasoning)?
Claude Sonnet 4.6 is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 65.07 to 58.01. The biggest single separator in this matchup is FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3), where the scores are 32.400% and 8.481%.
Which is better for math, Claude Sonnet 4.6 or Qwen3 235B 2507 (Reasoning)?
Claude Sonnet 4.6 has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 26.4 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.