Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Claude Opus 5.5 vs Qwen3.8 27B

Claude Opus 5.5 leads Qwen3.8 27B on coding, 88.8 to 74.2 on the Vibe Coding Index, and Qwen3.8 27B costs 7.8x less per output token ($2.55 vs $20.00 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 67 benchmarks have a result for both.

Replace Claude Opus 5.5 Replace Qwen3.8 27B
Claude Opus 5.5Anthropic
Coding
88.8
Overall
87.1
Output $/M
$20.00
66
Qwen3.8 27BQwen
Coding
74.2
Overall
59.6
Output $/M
$2.55
1
vs boards won of 67 shared

Claude Opus 5.5 or Qwen3.8 27B: which to pick

Pick Claude Opus 5.5 for coding: it scores 88.8 on the Vibe Coding Index against 74.2 for Qwen3.8 27B.

Pick Qwen3.8 27B for output tokens 7.8x cheaper ($2.55 vs $20.00 per million) and work measured by SAGE (Vals AI), where it leads.

Model AClaude Opus 5.5Anthropic88.8/1005 independent benchmarksNo cost per solved taskModel BQwen3.8 27BQwen74.2/1004 independent benchmarks$1.26 per solved task
Shared results
67
Claude Opus 5.5 only
42
Qwen3.8 27B only
18
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 5.5 88.8 from 5 benchmarks, Qwen3.8 27B 74.2 from 4 benchmarks.
Widest category
Math, 34.7 points apart on average over 3 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
ProofBench: Claude Opus 5.5 100.0% against Qwen3.8 27B 16.0%, 84.0 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Claude Opus 5.5 $20.00 against Qwen3.8 27B $2.55 per million output tokens, 7.8x apart.
Context window
Both take 1M tokens.

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 5.5BarsQwen3.8 27BTies
Coding140
Intelligence20
Agentic work90
Reasoning90
Math30
Knowledge50
Web design10
General231
All shared boards661
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index140
Coding benchmarks for Claude Opus 5.5 and Qwen3.8 27B
BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen3.8 27BLeader
LiveBench coding96.3%86.8%Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena WebDev18071593Claude Opus 5.5
AA Coding IndexNot measured68.1Only Qwen3.8 27B measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)Not measured84.0%Only Qwen3.8 27B measured
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)Not measured86.0%Only Qwen3.8 27B measured
Terminal-Bench 4 (Vals AI)65.2%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)90.3%64.8%Claude Opus 5.5
Code migration (Vals AI)66.7%14.2%Claude Opus 5.5
ProgramBench (Vals AI)18.5%0.0%Claude Opus 5.5
IOI (Vals AI)95.1%39.1%Claude Opus 5.5
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals AI)87.6%58.4%Claude Opus 5.5
SWE-bench Multimodal (Vals AI)70.2%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Vibe Code Bench 1-100 (Vals AI)30.4%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
SkillsBench (Vals AI)Not measured38.1%Only Qwen3.8 27B measured
CyberBench (Vals AI)74.6%67.8%Claude Opus 5.5
SciCode66.9%46.6%Claude Opus 5.5
FrontierCode54.6%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
FrontierSWE62.3%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
MirrorCode77.4%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
ALE-Bench2147.4Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
LMArena Text: coding15451483Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena Text: software and IT15381478Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena WebDev: React18551602Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena WebDev: HTML17531570Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena WebDev: from an image17531577Claude Opus 5.5
SciCode18.5%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 13 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
Intelligence benchmarks for Claude Opus 5.5 and Qwen3.8 27B
BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen3.8 27BLeader
AA Intelligence Index57.633.7Claude Opus 5.5
Epoch Capabilities Index168.8151.7Claude Opus 5.5
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index90
Agentic work benchmarks for Claude Opus 5.5 and Qwen3.8 27B
BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen3.8 27BLeader
AA Agentic IndexNot measured45.8Only Qwen3.8 27B measured
Design Arena: agents building web apps1316Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Design Arena: agents building mobile apps1308Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Design Arena: spreadsheets1368Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
LiveBench research85.0%59.4%Claude Opus 5.5
LiveBench browser80.0%32.0%Claude Opus 5.5
LiveBench long agentic85.0%27.9%Claude Opus 5.5
SREBench (Vals AI)33.6%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Finance Agent (Vals AI)58.6%48.5%Claude Opus 5.5
Tax Agent Bench (Vals AI)45.6%30.9%Claude Opus 5.5
Legal Research Bench (Vals AI)50.5%36.1%Claude Opus 5.5
Harvey's Legal Agent Benchmark (Vals AI)9.2%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Excel Modeling Benchmark (Vals AI)75.9%59.7%Claude Opus 5.5
BioMysteryBench (Vals AI)79.3%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Terminal-Bench-Science (Vals AI)47.1%0.0%Claude Opus 5.5
Vals Science Index58.7%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Time Horizon Index (Vals AI)91.3%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
CUA-bench (Vals AI)14.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Robo-bench (Vals AI)14.6%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
APEX-Agents73.5%47.5%Claude Opus 5.5
Remote Labor Index21.3%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
SpireClimb3.3%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Vending-Bench 2$9,235Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
LMArena Search1213Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 17 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index90
Reasoning benchmarks for Claude Opus 5.5 and Qwen3.8 27B
BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen3.8 27BLeader
GPQA DiamondNot measured88.9%Only Qwen3.8 27B measured
LiveBench reasoning92.2%80.0%Claude Opus 5.5
MysteryMechanism (Vals AI)49.5%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
MMMU Pro (Vals AI)Not measured83.9%Only Qwen3.8 27B measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured90.5%Only Qwen3.8 27B measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)61.4%33.9%Claude Opus 5.5
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)90.6%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
ARC-AGI98.5%87.5%Claude Opus 5.5
ARC-AGI-293.3%42.4%Claude Opus 5.5
Chess puzzles67.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Mystery game puzzles71.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
EBR-bench71.4%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts15361459Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena Text: expert15491479Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English15351461Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena Vision: diagrams13451285Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena Vision: homework13621295Claude Opus 5.5
Neither model has a result on the other 5 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index30
Math benchmarks for Claude Opus 5.5 and Qwen3.8 27B
BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen3.8 27BLeader
OTIS Mock AIME100.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 391.2%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
FrontierMath, tier 495.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
ProofBench100.0%16.0%Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena Text: math15181455Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena Text: mathematical work15161458Claude Opus 5.5
Neither model has a result on the other 7 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index50
Knowledge benchmarks for Claude Opus 5.5 and Qwen3.8 27B
BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen3.8 27BLeader
MMLU ProNot measured84.3%Only Qwen3.8 27B measured
LegalBench (Vals AI)Not measured82.4%Only Qwen3.8 27B measured
TaxEval (Vals AI)Not measured70.8%Only Qwen3.8 27B measured
MortgageTax (Vals AI)Not measured64.9%Only Qwen3.8 27B measured
MedCode (Vals AI)49.8%28.7%Claude Opus 5.5
SimpleQA Verified72.2%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
LMArena Text: science15241467Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare15091437Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena Text: legal and government15181447Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena Text: business and finance14941438Claude Opus 5.5
FACTS Benchmark Suite65.3%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 7 boards here
Web designLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Web design benchmarks for Claude Opus 5.5 and Qwen3.8 27B
BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen3.8 27BLeader
Design Arena: websites1335Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Design Arena: UI components1385Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Design Arena: game dev1461Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Design Arena: data viz1397Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Design Arena: 3D1476Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Design Arena: all code categories1390Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Design Arena: SVG1329Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
LiveBench design86.9%75.9%Claude Opus 5.5
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index231
General benchmarks for Claude Opus 5.5 and Qwen3.8 27B
BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen3.8 27BLeader
Vals Index70.2%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
LiveBench data analysis80.3%76.6%Claude Opus 5.5
Public Benefits Bench (Vals AI)70.6%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
SAGE (Vals AI)45.8%52.4%Qwen3.8 27B
MedScribe (Vals AI)91.4%83.8%Claude Opus 5.5
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)84.7%82.0%Claude Opus 5.5
DTBench98.9%88.0%Claude Opus 5.5
LMCA68.2%41.4%Claude Opus 5.5
Surface Evolver BenchNot measured45.0%Only Qwen3.8 27B measured
Furniture assembly83.3%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
LMArena Text15161440Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena Text: instruction following15371436Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena Text: creative writing15351383Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena Vision13211269Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena Text: English15191448Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena Text: non-English15071428Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena Text: Chinese15821501Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena Text: GermanNot measured1443Only Qwen3.8 27B measured
LMArena Text: Japanese15341387Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena Text: KoreanNot measured1384Only Qwen3.8 27B measured
LMArena Text: French14931465Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena Text: Spanish15081449Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena Text: Russian15171415Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena Text: PolishNot measured1439Only Qwen3.8 27B measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn15011440Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena Text: longer queries15321448Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena Text: writing and language15321405Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena Text: entertainment and media15151393Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena Vision: English13171267Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena Vision: ChineseNot measured1326Only Qwen3.8 27B measured
LMArena Vision: reading text13261281Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena Vision: humorNot measured1235Only Qwen3.8 27B measured
LMArena Vision: creative writing13201237Claude Opus 5.5
Neither model has a result on the other 13 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for Claude Opus 5.5 and Qwen3.8 27B
BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen3.8 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 5.5$0.014Fits in one request
Qwen3.8 27B$0.0017Fits in one request

Qwen3.8 27B costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Claude Opus 5.5$0.260Fits in one request
Qwen3.8 27B$0.029Fits in one request

Qwen3.8 27B costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Claude Opus 5.5$1.00Fits in one request
Qwen3.8 27B$0.111Fits 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 5.5 and Qwen3.8 27B
SpecificationAnthropic Claude Opus 5.5Qwen3.8 27B
MakerAnthropicQwen
WeightsNo public weights listedOpen weights
ReleasedSeptember 22, 2026August 14, 2026
Context window1M1M
Input $/Mtok$4.00$0.425
Output $/Mtok$20.00$2.55
Coding index88.874.2
Independent measurements behind it54
Cost per solved taskNot computable$1.26
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Claude Opus 5.5 better than Qwen3.8 27B for coding?

Pick Claude Opus 5.5 for coding: it scores 88.8 on the Vibe Coding Index against 74.2 for Qwen3.8 27B. Pick Qwen3.8 27B for output tokens 7.8x cheaper ($2.55 vs $20.00 per million) and work measured by SAGE (Vals AI), where it leads.

Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 5.5 or Qwen3.8 27B?

Claude Opus 5.5 costs $4.00 per million input tokens and $20.00 per million output tokens; Qwen3.8 27B costs $0.425 and $2.55. Cost per solved task is known for Qwen3.8 27B only.

Which has the bigger context window, Claude Opus 5.5 or Qwen3.8 27B?

Neither: both take 1M tokens.

How many benchmarks is the Claude Opus 5.5 vs Qwen3.8 27B comparison based on?

67 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. Claude Opus 5.5's coding index rests on 5 independent benchmarks and Qwen3.8 27B's on 4. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next

Embed this comparison on your site

Free under CC BY 4.0, while the source link stays visible. Preview the frame · Terms and other embeds

<iframe src="https://llmbenchmark.ai/embed/compare/claude-opus-5-5-vs-qwen3-8-27b" title="Claude Opus 5.5 vs Qwen3.8 27B, LLMBenchmark.ai" width="100%" height="360" style="border:0;max-width:100%" loading="lazy"></iframe>
<p style="font:13px/1.4 sans-serif;margin:6px 0 0">Source: <a href="https://llmbenchmark.ai/compare/claude-opus-5-5-vs-qwen3-8-27b">LLMBenchmark.ai, Claude Opus 5.5 vs Qwen3.8 27B</a></p>