Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Claude Opus 4.5 vs Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507

Claude Opus 4.5 leads Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 29.1 to 12.7, and Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 costs 7.1x less per output token ($3.50 vs $25.00 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 42 benchmarks have a result for both.

Claude Opus 4.5Anthropic
Coding
44.0
Overall
55.7
Output $/M
$25.00
39
Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507Qwen
Coding
No data
Overall
52.9
Output $/M
$3.50
3
vs boards won of 42 shared

Claude Opus 4.5 or Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507: which to pick

Only Claude Opus 4.5 has a coding score, 44.0 on the Vibe Coding Index; Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 for output tokens 7.1x cheaper ($3.50 vs $25.00 per million) and work measured by OTIS Mock AIME or LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare, where it leads.

Shared results
42
Claude Opus 4.5 only
70
Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 only
4
Like-for-like categories
8 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 4.5 44.0 from 3 benchmarks, Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 not benchmarked.
Widest category
Agentic work, 31.0 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
Design Arena: UI components: Claude Opus 4.5 1236 against Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 942, 36.8 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Claude Opus 4.5 $25.00 against Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 $3.50 per million output tokens, 7.1x apart.
Context window
Claude Opus 4.5 takes 200K tokens, Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 128K.

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 4.5BarsQwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507Ties
Coding30
Intelligence10
Agentic work10
Reasoning50
Math21
Knowledge41
Web design60
General171
All shared boards393
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index30
Coding benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.5 and Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507Leader
SWE-bench Verified79.2%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.5 measured
SWE-bench (full test set)52.6%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.5 measured
SWE-bench Multilingual70.7%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.5 measured
LMArena WebDev1494Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.5 measured
AA Coding IndexNot measured22.1Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)83.7%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.5 measured
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)76.4%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.5 measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)20.6%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.5 measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)87.1%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.5 measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)47.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.5 measured
Terminal-Bench63.1%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.5 measured
GSO-Bench26.5%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.5 measured
WeirdML63.7%41.0%Claude Opus 4.5
Cybench82.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.5 measured
LMArena Text: coding15031424Claude Opus 4.5
LMArena Text: software and IT14831431Claude Opus 4.5
LMArena WebDev: React1478Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.5 measured
LMArena WebDev: HTML1510Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 25 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Intelligence benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.5 and Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507Leader
AA Intelligence Index29.112.7Claude Opus 4.5
Epoch Capabilities Index150.1Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.5 measured
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Agentic work benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.5 and Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507Leader
AA Agentic IndexNot measured1.3Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured
Design Arena: agents building web apps1159Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.5 measured
Design Arena: agents building full-stack apps1156Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.5 measured
Design Arena: agents building mobile apps1188Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.5 measured
Design Arena: agents building Android apps1176Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.5 measured
τ²-Bench Telecom89.5%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.5 measured
METR time horizons75.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.5 measured
Remote Labor Index3.8%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.5 measured
GDPval45.5%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.5 measured
BALROG43.5%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.5 measured
DeepResearch Bench54.8%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.5 measured
OSWorld66.3%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.5 measured
Vending-Bench 2$4,967-$11Claude Opus 4.5
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL)77.5%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.5 measured
MCP Atlas69.8%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 27 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index50
Reasoning benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.5 and Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507Leader
GPQA Diamond85.9%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.5 measured
MMMU Pro (Vals AI)83.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.5 measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)86.6%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.5 measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)30.1%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.5 measured
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)86.0%80.1%Claude Opus 4.5
ARC-AGI80.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.5 measured
ARC-AGI-237.6%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.5 measured
SimpleBench62.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.5 measured
Chess puzzles14.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.5 measured
Mystery game puzzles22.0%9.0%Claude Opus 4.5
EBR-bench14.3%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.5 measured
VPCT40.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.5 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts14761416Claude Opus 4.5
LMArena Text: expert14871463Claude Opus 4.5
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English14821432Claude Opus 4.5
Kagi LLM Benchmark80.2%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 7 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index21
Math benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.5 and Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507Leader
AIME95.4%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.5 measured
MGSM (Vals AI)95.2%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.5 measured
AA Math Index91.3Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.5 measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)91.3%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.5 measured
OTIS Mock AIME86.1%86.7%Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 334.4%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.5 measured
FrontierMath, tier 44.9%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.5 measured
ProofBench36.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.5 measured
LMArena Text: math14631412Claude Opus 4.5
LMArena Text: mathematical work14681435Claude Opus 4.5
Neither model has a result on the other 4 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index41
Knowledge benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.5 and Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507Leader
MMLU Pro87.3%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.5 measured
LegalBench (Vals AI)84.6%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.5 measured
CaseLaw (Vals AI)62.6%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.5 measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)65.1%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.5 measured
TaxEval (Vals AI)74.9%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.5 measured
MortgageTax (Vals AI)68.7%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.5 measured
MedQA (Vals AI)95.9%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.5 measured
MedCode (Vals AI)49.2%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.5 measured
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)89.5%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.5 measured
SimpleQA Verified45.7%40.4%Claude Opus 4.5
GeoBench75.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.5 measured
LMArena Text: science14541433Claude Opus 4.5
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare14441456Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
LMArena Text: legal and government14591415Claude Opus 4.5
LMArena Text: business and finance14481413Claude Opus 4.5
FACTS Benchmark Suite43.9%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.5 measured
PRBench Finance46.2%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.5 measured
PRBench Legal44.2%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 2 boards here
Web designLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index60
Web design benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.5 and Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507Leader
Design Arena: websites12471052Claude Opus 4.5
Design Arena: UI components1236942Claude Opus 4.5
Design Arena: game dev1228956Claude Opus 4.5
Design Arena: data viz1243950Claude Opus 4.5
Design Arena: 3D1213997Claude Opus 4.5
Design Arena: all code categories12411032Claude Opus 4.5
Design Arena: SVG1180Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.5 measured
Design Arena: ASCII art1190Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index171
General benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.5 and Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507Leader
SAGE (Vals AI)52.1%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.5 measured
MedScribe (Vals AI)85.3%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.5 measured
IFBench58.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.5 measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)77.3%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.5 measured
DTBench89.9%80.3%Claude Opus 4.5
LMCA44.5%29.3%Claude Opus 4.5
Fiction.LiveBenchNot measured75.0%Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured
Creative writing (Lech Mazur)Not measured82.4%Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured
CL-bench21.1%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.5 measured
Furniture assembly28.3%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.5 measured
LMArena Text14511415Claude Opus 4.5
LMArena Text: instruction following14781386Claude Opus 4.5
LMArena Text: creative writing14451384Claude Opus 4.5
LMArena Text: English14611429Claude Opus 4.5
LMArena Text: non-English14381397Claude Opus 4.5
LMArena Text: Chinese14701481Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
LMArena Text: German14491408Claude Opus 4.5
LMArena Text: Japanese14171386Claude Opus 4.5
LMArena Text: Korean14241375Claude Opus 4.5
LMArena Text: French1471Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.5 measured
LMArena Text: Spanish14571389Claude Opus 4.5
LMArena Text: Russian14471401Claude Opus 4.5
LMArena Text: Polish14391390Claude Opus 4.5
LMArena Text: multi-turn14661406Claude Opus 4.5
LMArena Text: longer queries14791400Claude Opus 4.5
LMArena Text: writing and language14521388Claude Opus 4.5
LMArena Text: entertainment and media14341370Claude Opus 4.5
LMArena Document1462Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.5 measured
MultiChallenge59.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 19 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.5 and Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507Leader
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 4.5$0.018Fits in one request
Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507$0.0022Fits in one request

Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Claude Opus 4.5$0.325Fits in one request
Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507$0.033Fits in one request

Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Claude Opus 4.5$1.25Exceeds the context window
Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507$0.125Exceeds the context window

Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 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 4.5 and Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
SpecificationAnthropic Claude Opus 4.5Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
MakerAnthropicQwen
WeightsNo public weights listedOpen weights
ReleasedNovember 24, 2025July 25, 2025
Context window200K128K
Input $/Mtok$5.00$0.45
Output $/Mtok$25.00$3.50
Coding index44.0Not benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it30
Cost per solved task$1.37Not computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Claude Opus 4.5 better than Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 for coding?

Only Claude Opus 4.5 has a coding score, 44.0 on the Vibe Coding Index; Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 for output tokens 7.1x cheaper ($3.50 vs $25.00 per million) and work measured by OTIS Mock AIME or LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare, where it leads.

Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.5 or Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507?

Claude Opus 4.5 costs $5.00 per million input tokens and $25.00 per million output tokens; Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 costs $0.45 and $3.50. Cost per solved task is known for Claude Opus 4.5 only.

Which has the bigger context window, Claude Opus 4.5 or Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507?

Claude Opus 4.5, with 200K tokens against 128K.

How many benchmarks is the Claude Opus 4.5 vs Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 comparison based on?

42 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. Claude Opus 4.5's coding index rests on 3 independent benchmarks and Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next