Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Claude Opus 4.1 vs Qwen3.8 27B

Updated October 21, 2026. 44 benchmarks have a result for both. Coding is ranked on the Vibe Coding Index; every other board is shown as published.

Replace Claude Opus 4.1 Replace Qwen3.8 27B
Claude Opus 4.1Anthropic
Coding
27.2
Overall
22.8
Output $/M
$75.00
10
Qwen3.8 27BQwen
Coding
73.6
Overall
33.7
Output $/M
$1.35
34
vs boards won of 44 shared

Decision reading

Pick Qwen3.8 27B for coding: it scores 73.6 on the Vibe Coding Index against 27.2 for Claude Opus 4.1.

Pick Claude Opus 4.1 when what matters is MMLU Pro or LegalBench (Vals AI), where it leads.

Model AClaude Opus 4.1Anthropic27.2/1001 independent benchmarkNo cost per solved taskModel BQwen3.8 27BQwen73.6/1002 independent benchmarks$1.26 per solved task
Shared results
44
Claude Opus 4.1 only
27
Qwen3.8 27B only
41
Like-for-like categories
6 of 9

Shared results can support a head-to-head reading. Results only one model has describe coverage, not superiority.

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 27.2 from 1 benchmark, Qwen3.8 27B 73.6 from 2 benchmarks.
Widest category
Coding, 15.9 points apart on average over 5 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
LMArena WebDev: Claude Opus 4.1 1390 against Qwen3.8 27B 1593, 28.9 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Claude Opus 4.1 $75.00 against Qwen3.8 27B $1.35 per million output tokens, 55.6x apart.
Context window
Claude Opus 4.1 takes 200K tokens, Qwen3.8 27B 1M.

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 4.1BarsQwen3.8 27BTies
Coding05
Intelligence02
Reasoning05
Math02
Knowledge45
General615
All shared boards1034
CodingLike-for-likeFour of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index05
Coding benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.1 and Qwen3.8 27B
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Qwen3.8 27BLeader
LiveBench codingNot measured86.8%Only Qwen3.8 27B measured
LMArena WebDev13901593Qwen3.8 27B
AA Coding IndexNot measured68.1Only Qwen3.8 27B measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)66.5%84.0%Qwen3.8 27B
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)Not measured86.0%Only Qwen3.8 27B measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)Not measured64.8%Only Qwen3.8 27B measured
Code migration (Vals AI)Not measured14.2%Only Qwen3.8 27B measured
ProgramBench (Vals AI)Not measured0.0%Only Qwen3.8 27B measured
IOI (Vals AI)Not measured39.1%Only Qwen3.8 27B measured
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals AI)Not measured58.4%Only Qwen3.8 27B measured
SkillsBench (Vals AI)Not measured38.1%Only Qwen3.8 27B measured
CyberBench (Vals AI)Not measured67.8%Only Qwen3.8 27B measured
SciCodeNot measured46.6%Only Qwen3.8 27B 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
LMArena Text: coding14791483Qwen3.8 27B
LMArena Text: software and IT14561478Qwen3.8 27B
LMArena WebDev: ReactNot measured1602Only Qwen3.8 27B measured
LMArena WebDev: HTML13991570Qwen3.8 27B
LMArena WebDev: from an imageNot measured1577Only Qwen3.8 27B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 17 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
Intelligence benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.1 and Qwen3.8 27B
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Qwen3.8 27BLeader
AA Intelligence Index22.833.7Qwen3.8 27B
Epoch Capabilities Index144.1151.7Qwen3.8 27B
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index13 boards, none shared
Agentic work benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.1 and Qwen3.8 27B
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Qwen3.8 27BLeader
AA Agentic IndexNot measured45.8Only Qwen3.8 27B measured
LiveBench researchNot measured59.4%Only Qwen3.8 27B measured
LiveBench browserNot measured32.0%Only Qwen3.8 27B measured
LiveBench long agenticNot measured27.9%Only Qwen3.8 27B measured
Finance Agent (Vals AI)Not measured48.5%Only Qwen3.8 27B measured
Tax Agent Bench (Vals AI)Not measured30.9%Only Qwen3.8 27B measured
Legal Research Bench (Vals AI)Not measured36.1%Only Qwen3.8 27B measured
Excel Modeling Benchmark (Vals AI)Not measured59.7%Only Qwen3.8 27B measured
Terminal-Bench-Science (Vals AI)Not measured0.0%Only Qwen3.8 27B measured
APEX-AgentsNot measured47.5%Only Qwen3.8 27B 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 26 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index05
Reasoning benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.1 and Qwen3.8 27B
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Qwen3.8 27BLeader
GPQA Diamond76.3%88.9%Qwen3.8 27B
LiveBench reasoningNot measured80.0%Only Qwen3.8 27B measured
MMMU Pro (Vals AI)77.5%83.9%Qwen3.8 27B
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured90.5%Only Qwen3.8 27B measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured33.9%Only Qwen3.8 27B measured
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)77.3%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
ARC-AGINot measured87.5%Only Qwen3.8 27B measured
ARC-AGI-2Not measured42.4%Only Qwen3.8 27B measured
SimpleBench60.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
Mystery game puzzles21.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
EBR-bench7.9%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
VPCT35.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts14421459Qwen3.8 27B
LMArena Text: expert14381479Qwen3.8 27B
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English14511461Qwen3.8 27B
LMArena Vision: diagramsNot measured1285Only Qwen3.8 27B measured
LMArena Vision: homeworkNot measured1295Only Qwen3.8 27B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 4 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
Math benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.1 and Qwen3.8 27B
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Qwen3.8 27BLeader
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%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 312.6%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
FrontierMath, tier 42.4%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
ProofBenchNot measured16.0%Only Qwen3.8 27B measured
LMArena Text: math14311455Qwen3.8 27B
LMArena Text: mathematical work14341458Qwen3.8 27B
Neither model has a result on the other 4 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index45
Knowledge benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.1 and Qwen3.8 27B
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Qwen3.8 27BLeader
MMLU Pro87.9%84.3%Claude Opus 4.1
LegalBench (Vals AI)83.5%82.4%Claude Opus 4.1
TaxEval (Vals AI)73.7%70.8%Claude Opus 4.1
MortgageTax (Vals AI)61.1%64.9%Qwen3.8 27B
MedQA (Vals AI)93.6%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
MedCode (Vals AI)47.2%28.7%Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: science14221467Qwen3.8 27B
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare14161437Qwen3.8 27B
LMArena Text: legal and government14211447Qwen3.8 27B
LMArena Text: business and finance14061438Qwen3.8 27B
Neither model has a result on the other 7 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index9 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.1 and Qwen3.8 27B
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Qwen3.8 27BLeader
Design Arena: websites1177Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
Design Arena: UI components1164Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
Design Arena: game dev1172Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
Design Arena: data viz1166Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
Design Arena: 3D1153Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
Design Arena: all code categories1171Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
Design Arena: SVG1152Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
Design Arena: ASCII art1167Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LiveBench designNot measured75.9%Only Qwen3.8 27B measured
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index615
General benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.1 and Qwen3.8 27B
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Qwen3.8 27BLeader
LiveBench data analysisNot measured76.6%Only Qwen3.8 27B measured
SAGE (Vals AI)31.4%52.4%Qwen3.8 27B
MedScribe (Vals AI)73.9%83.8%Qwen3.8 27B
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)Not measured82.0%Only Qwen3.8 27B measured
DTBench80.0%88.0%Qwen3.8 27B
LMCA37.1%41.4%Qwen3.8 27B
Creative writing (Lech Mazur)84.7%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
Surface Evolver BenchNot measured45.0%Only Qwen3.8 27B measured
LMArena Text14191440Qwen3.8 27B
LMArena Text: instruction following14351436Qwen3.8 27B
LMArena Text: creative writing14121383Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena VisionNot measured1269Only Qwen3.8 27B measured
LMArena Text: English14331448Qwen3.8 27B
LMArena Text: non-English14051428Qwen3.8 27B
LMArena Text: Chinese14271501Qwen3.8 27B
LMArena Text: German14131443Qwen3.8 27B
LMArena Text: Japanese13771387Qwen3.8 27B
LMArena Text: Korean13811384Qwen3.8 27B
LMArena Text: French14331465Qwen3.8 27B
LMArena Text: Spanish14481449Qwen3.8 27B
LMArena Text: Russian14221415Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: Polish14131439Qwen3.8 27B
LMArena Text: multi-turn14441440Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: longer queries14551448Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: writing and language14181405Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: entertainment and media13981393Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Vision: EnglishNot measured1267Only Qwen3.8 27B measured
LMArena Vision: ChineseNot measured1326Only Qwen3.8 27B measured
LMArena Vision: reading textNot measured1281Only Qwen3.8 27B measured
LMArena Vision: humorNot measured1235Only Qwen3.8 27B measured
LMArena Vision: creative writingNot measured1237Only Qwen3.8 27B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 15 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 Qwen3.8 27B
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Qwen3.8 27BLeader
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
Qwen3.8 27B$0.0007Fits in one request

Qwen3.8 27B costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Claude Opus 4.1$0.975Fits in one request
Qwen3.8 27B$0.0060Fits in one request

Qwen3.8 27B costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Claude Opus 4.1$3.75Exceeds the context window
Qwen3.8 27B$0.021Fits in one request

Qwen3.8 27B 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 Qwen3.8 27B
SpecificationAnthropic Claude Opus 4.1Qwen3.8 27B
MakerAnthropicQwen
WeightsNo public weights listedOpen weights
ReleasedAugust 5, 2025August 14, 2026
Context window200K1M
Input $/Mtok$15.00$0.04
Output $/Mtok$75.00$1.35
Coding index27.273.6
Independent measurements behind it12
Cost per solved taskNot computable$1.26
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Claude Opus 4.1 better than Qwen3.8 27B for coding?

Pick Qwen3.8 27B for coding: it scores 73.6 on the Vibe Coding Index against 27.2 for Claude Opus 4.1. Pick Claude Opus 4.1 when what matters is MMLU Pro or LegalBench (Vals AI), where it leads.

Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.1 or Qwen3.8 27B?

Claude Opus 4.1 costs $15.00 per million input tokens and $75.00 per million output tokens; Qwen3.8 27B costs $0.04 and $1.35. Cost per solved task is known for Qwen3.8 27B only.

Which has the bigger context window, Claude Opus 4.1 or Qwen3.8 27B?

Qwen3.8 27B, with 1M tokens against 200K.

How many benchmarks is the Claude Opus 4.1 vs Qwen3.8 27B comparison based on?

44 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. Claude Opus 4.1's coding index rests on 1 independent benchmark and Qwen3.8 27B's on 2. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next