Claude Opus 4.6 vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
Claude Opus 4.6 
Qwen3.8-Flash-Next Verdict
- Claude Opus 4.6 leads on quality: 63.7 vs 61.6.
- Claude Opus 4.6 is stronger in agents & tools, human preference, maths, multimodal.
- Qwen3.8-Flash-Next is stronger in coding, reasoning, composite, knowledge, long context.
- Qwen3.8-Flash-Next is 43× cheaper ($0.230 vs $10.00 per 1M blended).
- Qwen3.8-Flash-Next streams 1.6× faster (55 vs 34 tokens per second).
| Metric | Claude Opus 4.6 | Qwen3.8-Flash-Next |
|---|---|---|
| BenchLeader Index | 63.7 | 61.6 |
| Agents & tools score | 67.8 | 65.8 |
| Coding score | 62.3 | 71.2 |
| Human preference score | 64.7 | – |
| Maths score | 68.7 | – |
| Multimodal score | 67.0 | 64.3 |
| Reasoning score | 62.6 | 63.4 |
| Composite score | – | 67.4 |
| Knowledge score | – | 59.6 |
| Long context score | – | 66.3 |
| Blended price $/M | $10.00 | $0.230 |
| Output speed | 34 tok/s | 55 tok/s |
| Time to first answer | 1.7 s | 39.0 s |
| Context window | 1M | 256k |
| GPQA Diamond | 90.5% | – |
| OTIS Mock AIME | 94.4% | – |
| SWE-bench Verified (Epoch) | 78.7% | – |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 19.0% | – |
| Terminal-Bench | 79.8% | – |
| SimpleBench | 67.6% | – |
| Cybench | 93.0% | – |
| Remote Labor Index | 4.2% | – |
| WeirdML | 77.9% | – |
| APEX-Agents | 32.4% | – |
| FrontierCode | 26.6% | – |
| GSO-Bench | 33.3% | – |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 155.3 | – |
| LMArena Text | 1497 | – |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1527 | – |
| LMArena Coding | 1546 | – |
| LMArena WebDev | 1537 | 1635 |
| LMArena Vision | 1312 | – |
| LMArena Agent | – | -0.1 |
| LiveBench | – | 76.2% |
| LiveBench Reasoning | – | 87.4% |
| LiveBench Coding | – | 72.5% |
| LiveBench Agentic Coding | – | 61.6% |
| LiveBench Mathematics | – | 85.8% |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | – | 74.2% |
| LiveBench Language | – | 74.6% |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | – | 77.1% |
| AA Intelligence Index | – | 39.9 |
| AA-LCR | – | 79.7% |
| MMMU-Pro | – | 79.8% |
| AA-Omniscience | – | -9.7 |
| GPQA Diamond (AA) | – | 92.3% |
| Humanity's Last Exam (AA) | – | 38.0% |
| SciCode (AA) | – | 50.6% |
| HiL-Bench | 38.3% | – |
| EQ-Bench 4 | 1223 | – |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 72.4% | – |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 75.6% | – |
| SWE-bench Verified (any scaffold) | 75.6% | – |
| CritPt | – | 11.1% |
| GDPval (AA) | – | 57.4% |
| τ²-Bench Banking (AA) | – | 45.4% |
| MedCode | 48.2% | – |
| MedScribe | 86.7% | – |
| Vibe Code Bench v1.1 | 57.6% | – |
| SWE Atlas: Codebase QnA | 33.3% | – |
| SWE Atlas: Refactoring | 35.6% | – |
| SWE Atlas: Test Writing | 36.7% | – |
| LMArena Maths | 1507 | – |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1479 | – |
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1500 | – |
| LMArena Multi-turn | 1511 | – |
| LMArena Longer Queries | 1517 | – |
| LMArena Document | 1494 | – |
| Chess Puzzles | 17.0% | – |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 15.0% | – |
| CL-bench | 20.7% | – |
| CL-bench Life | 13.6% | – |
| METR Time Horizons | 78.9% | – |
| ForecastBench | 60.0% | – |
| GBAEval | 44.1% | – |
| ALE-Bench | 996.5 | – |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 8017.6 | – |
Data as of 2026-09-19. Best configuration of each model; every score links to its source on the model pages.
Claude Opus 4.6 vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next: questions
- Is Claude Opus 4.6 better than Qwen3.8-Flash-Next?
- Claude Opus 4.6 leads on quality: 63.7 vs 61.6. The BenchLeader Index combines every independent quality benchmark; Claude Opus 4.6 is ahead overall as of 2026-09-19, but check the category scores for your use.
- Is Claude Opus 4.6 better than Qwen3.8-Flash-Next for coding?
- Qwen3.8-Flash-Next scores higher in coding (71 vs 62 on the category index, where 50 is average).
- Is Claude Opus 4.6 better than Qwen3.8-Flash-Next for agentic tasks?
- Claude Opus 4.6 scores higher in agentic tasks (68 vs 66 on the category index, where 50 is average).
- Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.6 or Qwen3.8-Flash-Next?
- Qwen3.8-Flash-Next is cheaper: $0.230 against $10.00 per million tokens, blended at three input tokens per output token.
- Which is faster, Claude Opus 4.6 or Qwen3.8-Flash-Next?
- Qwen3.8-Flash-Next streams faster: 55 against 34 output tokens per second.
- Which has the larger context window?
- Claude Opus 4.6 accepts more context: 1M against 256k tokens.