Updated March 26, 2026· Based on independent benchmark data
Claude Opus 4.5 (Reasoning) leads in intelligence with a score of 49.7 vs 45.0. Qwen3.5 397B A17B (Reasoning) is 8.3x cheaper at $0.60/1M tokens vs $5.00/1M.
| Metric | Claude Opus 4.5 (Reasoning) | Qwen3.5 397B A17B (Reasoning) |
|---|---|---|
| Intelligence Score | 49.7 | 45.0 |
| Coding Score | 47.8 | 41.3 |
| Math Score | 91.3 | N/A |
| Speed (tok/s) | 57 tok/s | 53 tok/s |
| Latency (TTFT) | 10.41s | 1.46s |
| Input Price / 1M tokens | $5.00 | $0.60 |
| Output Price / 1M tokens | $25 | $3.60 |
| Context Window | N/A |
Claude Opus 4.5 (Reasoning) outperforms Qwen3.5 397B A17B (Reasoning) on the intelligence index with a score of 49.7 compared to 45.0. For coding tasks, Claude Opus 4.5 (Reasoning) has the edge with a coding score of 47.8 vs 41.3.
Both models deliver similar output speeds: Claude Opus 4.5 (Reasoning) at 57 tok/s and Qwen3.5 397B A17B (Reasoning) at 53 tok/s. Time to first token is 1.46s for Qwen3.5 397B A17B (Reasoning) vs 10.41s for Claude Opus 4.5 (Reasoning), which affects perceived responsiveness in interactive applications.
Qwen3.5 397B A17B (Reasoning) is more affordable at $0.60/1M input tokens ($3.60/1M output), while Claude Opus 4.5 (Reasoning) costs $5.00/1M input ($25/1M output). That makes Claude Opus 4.5 (Reasoning) 8.3x more expensive per token, which can add up significantly at scale. For a typical workload of 100 requests per day at 2,000 tokens each, Claude Opus 4.5 (Reasoning) would cost approximately $30.00/month vs $3.60/month for Qwen3.5 397B A17B (Reasoning) in input costs alone.
Choose Claude Opus 4.5 (Reasoning) when you need higher intelligence (49.7), stronger coding performance (47.8). Choose Qwen3.5 397B A17B (Reasoning) when you need lower cost.
Claude Opus 4.5 (Reasoning) scores higher on coding benchmarks (47.8 vs 41.3), making it the better choice for programming tasks.
Qwen3.5 397B A17B (Reasoning) is cheaper at $0.60/1M input tokens vs $5.00/1M for Claude Opus 4.5 (Reasoning).
Claude Opus 4.5 (Reasoning) is faster, producing output at 57 tok/s compared to Qwen3.5 397B A17B (Reasoning)'s 53 tok/s.
No, Claude Opus 4.5 (Reasoning) does not support image input. Neither model supports image input.
Data last synced: March 26, 2026
| N/A |
| Max Output Tokens | N/A | N/A |
| Input Modalities | Text | Text |
| Output Modalities | Text | Text |
| Free Tier | No | No |
It depends on your priorities. Claude Opus 4.5 (Reasoning) scores higher on intelligence (49.7), but Qwen3.5 397B A17B (Reasoning) may be better for specific use cases like budget-conscious projects or speed-critical applications.