Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Claude Opus 4.1 vs Qwen3.5 397B A17B

Claude Opus 4.1 leads Qwen3.5 397B A17B on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 22.8 to 21.4, and Qwen3.5 397B A17B costs 32.1x less per output token ($2.34 vs $75.00 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 45 benchmarks have a result for both.

Replace Claude Opus 4.1 Replace Qwen3.5 397B A17B
Claude Opus 4.1Anthropic
Coding
No data
Overall
50.2
Output $/M
$75.00
12
Qwen3.5 397B A17BQwen
Coding
No data
Overall
57.1
Output $/M
$2.34
33
vs boards won of 45 shared

Claude Opus 4.1 or Qwen3.5 397B A17B: which to pick

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick Claude Opus 4.1 for work measured by LMArena WebDev or LMArena Text: software and IT, where it leads.

Model AClaude Opus 4.1AnthropicNot benchmarked1 independent benchmarkNo cost per solved taskModel BQwen3.5 397B A17BQwenNot benchmarked1 independent benchmarkNo cost per solved task
Shared results
45
Claude Opus 4.1 only
28
Qwen3.5 397B A17B only
20
Like-for-like categories
7 of 9

Only benchmarks that tested both models count toward a pick; a result only one model has is shown but not compared.

Which one for your work

Each card is decided by one number both models carry. Where only one has it, the card says so and makes no call.

At a glance

Coding index
Claude Opus 4.1 not benchmarked, Qwen3.5 397B A17B not benchmarked.
Widest category
Math, 11.4 points apart on average over 4 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
OTIS Mock AIME: Claude Opus 4.1 68.9% against Qwen3.5 397B A17B 88.9%, 20.0 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Claude Opus 4.1 $75.00 against Qwen3.5 397B A17B $2.34 per million output tokens, 32.1x apart.
Context window
Claude Opus 4.1 takes 200K tokens, Qwen3.5 397B A17B 262K.

Benchmark by benchmark

First the score: boards each model leads, per category, where both have a result. Then every board, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale, so compare the two in a row, not one row with another.

Boards won, where both have a result
CategoryClaude Opus 4.1BarsQwen3.5 397B A17BTies
Coding13
Intelligence11
Reasoning23
Math04
Knowledge04
Web design34
General514
All shared boards1233
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index13
Coding benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.1 and Qwen3.5 397B A17B
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Qwen3.5 397B A17BLeader
LMArena WebDev13901400Qwen3.5 397B A17B
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)66.5%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
SciCodeNot measured44.8%Only Qwen3.5 397B A17B measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured40.9%Only Qwen3.5 397B A17B measured
Terminal-Bench38.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
WeirdML45.9%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
Cybench42.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
ALE-BenchNot measured621.9Only Qwen3.5 397B A17B measured
LMArena Text: coding14791464Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: software and IT14561463Qwen3.5 397B A17B
LMArena WebDev: ReactNot measured1388Only Qwen3.5 397B A17B measured
LMArena WebDev: HTML13991410Qwen3.5 397B A17B
SciCode4.6%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 26 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index11
Intelligence benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.1 and Qwen3.5 397B A17B
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Qwen3.5 397B A17BLeader
AA Intelligence Index22.821.4Claude Opus 4.1
Epoch Capabilities Index144.1146.8Qwen3.5 397B A17B
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index5 boards, none shared
Agentic work benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.1 and Qwen3.5 397B A17B
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Qwen3.5 397B A17BLeader
τ²-Bench TelecomNot measured95.6%Only Qwen3.5 397B A17B measured
APEX-AgentsNot measured24.9%Only Qwen3.5 397B A17B measured
METR time horizons66.8%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
GDPval43.6%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
DeepResearch Bench48.3%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 36 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index23
Reasoning benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.1 and Qwen3.5 397B A17B
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Qwen3.5 397B A17BLeader
GPQA Diamond76.3%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
MMMU Pro (Vals AI)77.5%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured89.3%Only Qwen3.5 397B A17B measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured29.0%Only Qwen3.5 397B A17B measured
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)77.3%86.4%Qwen3.5 397B A17B
SimpleBench60.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
Mystery game puzzles21.0%18.0%Claude Opus 4.1
EBR-bench7.9%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
VPCT35.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts14421448Qwen3.5 397B A17B
LMArena Text: expert14381462Qwen3.5 397B A17B
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English14511450Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Vision: diagramsNot measured1277Only Qwen3.5 397B A17B measured
LMArena Vision: homeworkNot measured1292Only Qwen3.5 397B A17B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 8 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index04
Math benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.1 and Qwen3.5 397B A17B
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Qwen3.5 397B A17BLeader
AIME78.2%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
MATH 500 (Vals AI)95.4%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
MGSM (Vals AI)94.4%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
OTIS Mock AIME68.9%88.9%Qwen3.5 397B A17B
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 312.6%31.2%Qwen3.5 397B A17B
FrontierMath, tier 42.4%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LMArena Text: math14311453Qwen3.5 397B A17B
LMArena Text: mathematical work14341454Qwen3.5 397B A17B
Neither model has a result on the other 5 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index04
Knowledge benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.1 and Qwen3.5 397B A17B
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Qwen3.5 397B A17BLeader
MMLU Pro87.9%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LegalBench (Vals AI)83.5%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
TaxEval (Vals AI)73.7%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
MortgageTax (Vals AI)61.1%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
MedQA (Vals AI)93.6%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
MedCode (Vals AI)47.2%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LMArena Text: science14221457Qwen3.5 397B A17B
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare14161455Qwen3.5 397B A17B
LMArena Text: legal and government14211441Qwen3.5 397B A17B
LMArena Text: business and finance14061435Qwen3.5 397B A17B
FACTS Benchmark Suite40.4%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 7 boards here
Web designLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index34
Web design benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.1 and Qwen3.5 397B A17B
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Qwen3.5 397B A17BLeader
Design Arena: websites11761190Qwen3.5 397B A17B
Design Arena: UI components11621161Claude Opus 4.1
Design Arena: game dev11711140Claude Opus 4.1
Design Arena: data viz11661175Qwen3.5 397B A17B
Design Arena: 3D11521160Qwen3.5 397B A17B
Design Arena: all code categories11701179Qwen3.5 397B A17B
Design Arena: SVG11511139Claude Opus 4.1
Design Arena: ASCII art1167Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index514
General benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.1 and Qwen3.5 397B A17B
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Qwen3.5 397B A17BLeader
SAGE (Vals AI)31.4%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
MedScribe (Vals AI)73.9%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
IFBenchNot measured78.8%Only Qwen3.5 397B A17B measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)Not measured77.3%Only Qwen3.5 397B A17B measured
DTBench80.0%87.5%Qwen3.5 397B A17B
LMCA37.1%37.9%Qwen3.5 397B A17B
Creative writing (Lech Mazur)84.7%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LMArena Text14191437Qwen3.5 397B A17B
LMArena Text: instruction following14351424Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: creative writing14121402Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena VisionNot measured1262Only Qwen3.5 397B A17B measured
LMArena Text: English14331443Qwen3.5 397B A17B
LMArena Text: non-English14051430Qwen3.5 397B A17B
LMArena Text: Chinese14271498Qwen3.5 397B A17B
LMArena Text: German14131445Qwen3.5 397B A17B
LMArena Text: Japanese13771429Qwen3.5 397B A17B
LMArena Text: Korean13811384Qwen3.5 397B A17B
LMArena Text: French14331462Qwen3.5 397B A17B
LMArena Text: Spanish14481441Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: Russian14221430Qwen3.5 397B A17B
LMArena Text: Polish14131447Qwen3.5 397B A17B
LMArena Text: multi-turn14441446Qwen3.5 397B A17B
LMArena Text: longer queries14551441Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: writing and language14181415Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: entertainment and media13981399Qwen3.5 397B A17B
LMArena Vision: EnglishNot measured1268Only Qwen3.5 397B A17B measured
LMArena Vision: ChineseNot measured1314Only Qwen3.5 397B A17B measured
LMArena Vision: reading textNot measured1271Only Qwen3.5 397B A17B measured
LMArena Vision: humorNot measured1262Only Qwen3.5 397B A17B measured
LMArena Vision: captioningNot measured1230Only Qwen3.5 397B A17B measured
LMArena Vision: recognizing thingsNot measured1265Only Qwen3.5 397B A17B measured
LMArena Vision: creative writingNot measured1260Only Qwen3.5 397B A17B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 14 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.1 and Qwen3.5 397B A17B
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Qwen3.5 397B A17BLeader
Neither model has a result on 5 boards here

What each workload costs

Three fixed token mixes at each model's listed price, so per-token rates become a bill.

Chat turn

1K input + 500 output tokens

Claude Opus 4.1$0.052Fits in one request
Qwen3.5 397B A17B$0.0016Fits in one request

Qwen3.5 397B A17B costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Claude Opus 4.1$0.975Fits in one request
Qwen3.5 397B A17B$0.027Fits in one request

Qwen3.5 397B A17B costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Claude Opus 4.1$3.75Exceeds the context window
Qwen3.5 397B A17B$0.101Fits in one request

Qwen3.5 397B A17B costs less

Listed OpenRouter rates, without cache or batch discounts. A workload that does not fit a model's context window would need splitting.

Specification differences

The leading value in a row is marked; a row with a missing value names no leader. Our two rows are marked in red.

Specifications of Claude Opus 4.1 and Qwen3.5 397B A17B
SpecificationAnthropic Claude Opus 4.1Qwen3.5 397B A17B
MakerAnthropicQwen
WeightsNo public weights listedOpen weights
ReleasedAugust 5, 2025February 16, 2026
Context window200K262K
Input $/Mtok$15.00$0.39
Output $/Mtok$75.00$2.34
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it11
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Claude Opus 4.1 better than Qwen3.5 397B A17B for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Claude Opus 4.1 for work measured by LMArena WebDev or LMArena Text: software and IT, where it leads.

Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.1 or Qwen3.5 397B A17B?

Claude Opus 4.1 costs $15.00 per million input tokens and $75.00 per million output tokens; Qwen3.5 397B A17B costs $0.39 and $2.34. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, Claude Opus 4.1 or Qwen3.5 397B A17B?

Qwen3.5 397B A17B, with 262K tokens against 200K.

How many benchmarks is the Claude Opus 4.1 vs Qwen3.5 397B A17B comparison based on?

45 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. Claude Opus 4.1's coding index rests on 1 independent benchmark and Qwen3.5 397B A17B's on 1. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next