Claude Opus 5 vs Qwen3.5 397B A17B
Claude Opus 5 
Qwen3.5 397B A17B Verdict
- Claude Opus 5 leads on quality: 70.0 vs 58.7.
- Claude Opus 5 is stronger in agents & tools, coding, composite, human preference, knowledge, long context, maths, multimodal, reasoning.
- Qwen3.5 397B A17B is stronger in instruction following.
- Qwen3.5 397B A17B is 26× cheaper ($0.387 vs $10.00 per 1M blended).
- Qwen3.5 397B A17B streams 1.5× faster (78 vs 51 tokens per second).
| Metric | Claude Opus 5 | Qwen3.5 397B A17B |
|---|---|---|
| BenchLeader Index | 70.0 | 58.7 |
| Agents & tools score | 71.5 | 69.4 |
| Coding score | 74.5 | 51.7 |
| Composite score | 93.1 | 53.1 |
| Human preference score | 78.2 | 63.6 |
| Knowledge score | 70.6 | 49.5 |
| Long context score | 66.2 | 65.2 |
| Maths score | 67.1 | 50.1 |
| Multimodal score | 69.4 | 61.6 |
| Reasoning score | 71.5 | 63.0 |
| Instruction following score | – | 76.1 |
| Blended price $/M | $10.00 | $0.387 |
| Output speed | 51 tok/s | 78 tok/s |
| Time to first answer | 93.0 s | 42.7 s |
| Context window | 1M | 262k |
| GPQA Diamond | 92.9% | 85.9% |
| FrontierMath Tiers 1–3 | – | 29.5% |
| OTIS Mock AIME | 97.8% | 88.9% |
| SimpleBench | 80.6% | – |
| WeirdML | 86.3% | – |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 162.6 | 147.0 |
| LMArena Text | – | 1441 |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | – | 1463 |
| LMArena Coding | – | 1491 |
| LMArena WebDev | – | 1399 |
| LMArena Vision | – | 1265 |
| AA Intelligence Index | 50.7 | 19.1 |
| IFBench | – | 78.8% |
| AA-LCR | 79.3% | 77.3% |
| MMMU-Pro | 84.7% | 77.3% |
| AA-Omniscience | 37.1 | -30.8 |
| Terminal-Bench Hard | – | 40.9% |
| GPQA Diamond (AA) | 93.2% | 89.3% |
| Humanity's Last Exam (AA) | 54.9% | 29.0% |
| SciCode (AA) | 56.4% | 44.8% |
| τ²-Bench Telecom (AA) | – | 95.6% |
| LiveCodeBench | 89.0% | – |
| MMLU-Pro | 91.6% | – |
| IOI | 91.7% | – |
| LegalBench | 87.0% | – |
| CorpFin | 73.2% | – |
| TaxEval | 75.1% | – |
| Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals) | 84.6% | – |
| SWE-bench (Vals) | 97.0% | – |
| GPQA Diamond (Vals) | 93.4% | – |
| Vals Index | 67.2 | – |
| AIME 2026 | – | 94.2% |
| HMMT February 2026 | – | 87.9% |
| HiL-Bench | 57.0% | – |
| EQ-Bench 4 | 1385 | – |
Data as of 2026-09-10. Best configuration of each model; every score links to its source on the model pages.
Claude Opus 5 vs Qwen3.5 397B A17B: questions
- Is Claude Opus 5 better than Qwen3.5 397B A17B?
- Claude Opus 5 leads on quality: 70.0 vs 58.7. The BenchLeader Index combines every independent quality benchmark; Claude Opus 5 is ahead overall as of 2026-09-10, but check the category scores for your use.
- Is Claude Opus 5 better than Qwen3.5 397B A17B for coding?
- Claude Opus 5 scores higher in coding (75 vs 52 on the category index, where 50 is average).
- Is Claude Opus 5 better than Qwen3.5 397B A17B for agentic tasks?
- Claude Opus 5 scores higher in agentic tasks (72 vs 69 on the category index, where 50 is average).
- Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 5 or Qwen3.5 397B A17B?
- Qwen3.5 397B A17B is cheaper: $0.387 against $10.00 per million tokens, blended at three input tokens per output token.
- Which is faster, Claude Opus 5 or Qwen3.5 397B A17B?
- Qwen3.5 397B A17B streams faster: 78 against 51 output tokens per second.
- Which has the larger context window?
- Claude Opus 5 accepts more context: 1M against 262k tokens.