Claude Opus 5 vs Qwen3.8 27B
Claude Opus 5 
Qwen3.8 27B Verdict
- Claude Opus 5 (high) leads on quality: 70.2 vs 59.2.
- Claude Opus 5 (high) is stronger in coding, composite, human preference, knowledge, maths, multimodal, reasoning.
- Qwen3.8 27B (xhigh) is stronger in agents & tools, long context.
- Qwen3.8 27B (xhigh) is 11× cheaper ($0.938 vs $10.00 per 1M blended).
| Metric | Claude Opus 5 (high) | Qwen3.8 27B (xhigh) |
|---|---|---|
| BenchLeader Index | 70.2 | 59.2 |
| Agents & tools score | 66.0 | 67.3 |
| Coding score | 71.9 | 53.2 |
| Composite score | 90.2 | 72.0 |
| Human preference score | 69.7 | – |
| Knowledge score | 80.3 | 56.4 |
| Long context score | 65.9 | 67.5 |
| Maths score | 72.3 | – |
| Multimodal score | 67.6 | 60.7 |
| Reasoning score | 75.6 | 52.5 |
| Blended price $/M | $10.00 | $0.938 |
| Output speed | 54 tok/s | 42 tok/s |
| Time to first answer | 16.7 s | 51.0 s |
| Context window | 1M | 262k |
| Terminal-Bench | 50.3% | – |
| OSWorld-Verified 2.0 | 29.0% | – |
| SciCode | 54.3% | 44.7% |
| WeirdML | 91.6% | – |
| LMArena Text | 1493 | – |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1517 | – |
| LMArena Coding | 1533 | – |
| LMArena WebDev | 1660 | – |
| LMArena Vision | 1321 | – |
| LMArena Agent | 10.2 | – |
| AA Intelligence Index | 48.2 | 33.9 |
| AA-LCR | 79.0% | 82.0% |
| MMMU-Pro | 82.4% | 76.3% |
| AA-Omniscience | 33.7 | -10.0 |
| GPQA Diamond (AA) | 93.7% | 90.5% |
| Humanity's Last Exam (AA) | 52.8% | 33.9% |
| SciCode (AA) | 55.4% | 46.6% |
| LiveCodeBench | – | 84.0% |
| MMLU-Pro | – | 84.3% |
| IOI | – | 39.1% |
| LegalBench | – | 82.4% |
| TaxEval | – | 70.8% |
| Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals) | – | 58.4% |
| SWE-bench (Vals) | – | 86.0% |
| GPQA Diamond (Vals) | – | 88.9% |
| Vals Index | – | 48.5 |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 97.5% | – |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 88.3% | – |
| ARC-AGI-3 | 30.2% | – |
| CritPt | 28.3% | 5.4% |
| GDPval (AA) | 56.5% | 48.2% |
| τ²-Bench Banking (AA) | 44.7% | 48.0% |
| Code Migration | – | 14.2% |
| Excel Modeling Benchmark | – | 59.7% |
| Finance Agent v2 | – | 48.5% |
| Harvey's Legal Agent Benchmark | – | 11.3% |
| Legal Research Bench | – | 36.1% |
| MedCode | – | 28.7% |
| MedScribe | – | 83.8% |
| MMMU-Pro (Vals) | – | 83.9% |
| MortgageTax | – | 64.9% |
| ProgramBench | – | 0.0% |
| SAGE | – | 52.4% |
| SkillsBench | – | 38.1% |
| Terminal-Bench 4.0 (Vals) | – | 4.0% |
| Terminal-Bench Science | – | 1.4% |
| Vibe Code Bench v1.1 | – | 64.8% |
| LMArena Maths | 1525 | – |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1474 | – |
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1499 | – |
| LMArena Multi-turn | 1484 | – |
| LMArena Longer Queries | 1508 | – |
| LMArena Document | 1490 | – |
| Surface Evolver Bench | – | 45.0% |
| DeepSWE | 72.8% | – |
| CursorBench | 66.7% | – |
| ALE-Bench | 2164.6 | – |
Data as of 2026-09-19. Best configuration of each model; every score links to its source on the model pages.
Claude Opus 5 vs Qwen3.8 27B: questions
- Is Claude Opus 5 better than Qwen3.8 27B?
- Claude Opus 5 (high) leads on quality: 70.2 vs 59.2. The BenchLeader Index combines every independent quality benchmark; Claude Opus 5 (high) is ahead overall as of 2026-09-19, but check the category scores for your use.
- Is Claude Opus 5 better than Qwen3.8 27B for coding?
- Claude Opus 5 scores higher in coding (72 vs 53 on the category index, where 50 is average).
- Is Claude Opus 5 better than Qwen3.8 27B for agentic tasks?
- Qwen3.8 27B scores higher in agentic tasks (67 vs 66 on the category index, where 50 is average).
- Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 5 or Qwen3.8 27B?
- Qwen3.8 27B is cheaper: $0.938 against $10.00 per million tokens, blended at three input tokens per output token.
- Which is faster, Claude Opus 5 or Qwen3.8 27B?
- Claude Opus 5 streams faster: 54 against 42 output tokens per second.
- Which has the larger context window?
- Claude Opus 5 accepts more context: 1M against 262k tokens.