Claude Opus 5.5 vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
Claude Opus 5.5 
Qwen3.8-Flash-Next Verdict
- Claude Opus 5.5 (thinking) leads on quality: 70.7 vs 61.2.
- Claude Opus 5.5 (thinking) is stronger in composite, knowledge, long context, multimodal, reasoning.
- Qwen3.8-Flash-Next is stronger in agents & tools, coding.
- Qwen3.8-Flash-Next is 35× cheaper ($0.230 vs $8.00 per 1M blended).
| Metric | Claude Opus 5.5 (thinking) | Qwen3.8-Flash-Next |
|---|---|---|
| BenchLeader Index | 70.7 | 61.2 |
| Composite score | 95.0 | 66.3 |
| Knowledge score | 85.0 | 58.8 |
| Long context score | 68.5 | 66.0 |
| Multimodal score | 71.9 | 63.8 |
| Reasoning score | 95.0 | 62.2 |
| Agents & tools score | – | 65.8 |
| Coding score | – | 71.2 |
| Blended price $/M | $8.00 | $0.230 |
| Output speed | 48 tok/s | 54 tok/s |
| Time to first answer | 4.2 s | 39.7 s |
| Context window | 1M | 256k |
| LMArena WebDev | – | 1635 |
| 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 | 57.6 | 39.8 |
| AA-LCR | 84.7% | 79.7% |
| MMMU-Pro | 87.7% | 79.8% |
| AA-Omniscience | 46.4 | -9.7 |
| GPQA Diamond (AA) | – | 92.3% |
| Humanity's Last Exam (AA) | 61.4% | 38.0% |
| SciCode (AA) | 66.9% | 50.6% |
| CritPt | 31.7% | 11.1% |
| GDPval (AA) | 67.3% | 55.6% |
| τ²-Bench Banking (AA) | – | 45.4% |
| Terminal-Bench 4.0 (AA) | 59.6% | 25.3% |
| Terminal-Bench 2.1 (AA) | – | 86.1% |
| AutomationBench | 69.5% | – |
| GDP.pdf | 26.2% | – |
| Harvey LAB | 91.2% | – |
| AA-Omniscience: accuracy | 66.2% | 24.5% |
| AA-Omniscience: non-hallucination | 41.4% | 54.7% |
| AA-Briefcase | 1822 | – |
Data as of 2026-09-22. Best configuration of each model; every score links to its source on the model pages.
Claude Opus 5.5 vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next: questions
- Is Claude Opus 5.5 better than Qwen3.8-Flash-Next?
- Claude Opus 5.5 (thinking) leads on quality: 70.7 vs 61.2. The BenchLeader Index combines every independent quality benchmark; Claude Opus 5.5 (thinking) is ahead overall as of 2026-09-22, but check the category scores for your use.
- Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 5.5 or Qwen3.8-Flash-Next?
- Qwen3.8-Flash-Next is cheaper: $0.230 against $8.00 per million tokens, blended at three input tokens per output token.
- Which is faster, Claude Opus 5.5 or Qwen3.8-Flash-Next?
- Qwen3.8-Flash-Next streams faster: 54 against 48 output tokens per second.
- Which has the larger context window?
- Claude Opus 5.5 accepts more context: 1M against 256k tokens.