Noometry

Model comparison

Claude 3 Opus vs Qwen3.8 27B

Qwen3.8 27B is the stronger model overall, scoring 46.0 to 29.5 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 21 shared benchmarks.

Claude 3 Opus Anthropic

29.5

Rank #310 Confirmed

Qwen3.8 27B Alibaba (Qwen)

46.0

Rank #68 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 21 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude 3 Opus scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3.8 27B in 10 categories; 10 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where Qwen3.8 27B leads 41.0 to 14.6.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is DTBench: 61.6% for Claude 3 Opus and 88% for Qwen3.8 27B.
  • Qwen3.8 27B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Claude 3 OpusQwen3.8 27B
ProviderAnthropicAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index29.546.0
Released2024-02-292026-08-14
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window—262K
Max output—33K
Input $ / M tokens—$0.99
Output $ / M tokens—$1.49
Results tracked4631

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding Qwen3.8 27B leads

Claude 3 Opus: 32.9 (#267), Qwen3.8 27B: 50.5 (#44)

BenchmarkClaude 3 OpusQwen3.8 27B
LMArena Coding12641482
LMArena WebDev—1593
SciCode—46.6%
WeirdML19.2%—
BigCodeBench Instruct45.5%—
LiveBench Coding38.6%—
BigCodeBench Complete57.4%—
HumanEval+77.4%—
MBPP+73.3%—

Agentic & Tool Use Qwen3.8 27B leads

Claude 3 Opus: 24.6 (#116), Qwen3.8 27B: 32.9 (#57)

BenchmarkClaude 3 OpusQwen3.8 27B
APEX-Agents—47.5%
Cybench10%—
METR Time Horizons29.5%—

Reasoning Qwen3.8 27B leads

Claude 3 Opus: 14.6 (#324), Qwen3.8 27B: 41.0 (#54)

BenchmarkClaude 3 OpusQwen3.8 27B
LMArena Hard Prompts12451460
DTBench61.6%88%
LMCA17%41.4%
Epoch Capabilities Index126.91149.38
ARC-AGI-2—42.4%
SimpleBench23.5%—
NYT Connections (extended)—54.5%
ARC-AGI-1—87.5%
CritPt—5.4%
Chess Puzzles5%—
EnigmaEval0.8%—
LiveBench Reasoning40.6%—
LiveBench Data Analysis57.9%—
Surface Evolver Bench—45%
ForecastBench58.4—
LiveBench49.2%—
WinoGrande88.5%—

Math Qwen3.8 27B leads

Claude 3 Opus: 14.8 (#299), Qwen3.8 27B: 37.1 (#161)

BenchmarkClaude 3 OpusQwen3.8 27B
LMArena Math12731456
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-20254.7%—
ProofBench—16%
LiveBench Math43.6%—
MATH Level 537.5%—

Knowledge Qwen3.8 27B leads

Claude 3 Opus: 24.5 (#267), Qwen3.8 27B: 41.6 (#109)

BenchmarkClaude 3 OpusQwen3.8 27B
LMArena Expert12231482
GPQA Diamond47.2%—
SimpleQA Verified12.6%—
Confabulations22.7%—
MMLU84.6%—

Multimodal Qwen3.8 27B leads

Claude 3 Opus: 27.1 (#116), Qwen3.8 27B: 41.3 (#37)

BenchmarkClaude 3 OpusQwen3.8 27B
LMArena Vision10231271

Multilingual Qwen3.8 27B leads

Claude 3 Opus: 41.4 (#207), Qwen3.8 27B: 53.7 (#60)

BenchmarkClaude 3 OpusQwen3.8 27B
LMArena Non-English12581430
LMArena Chinese12481504
LMArena French12751465
LMArena German12581438
LMArena Japanese12041384
LMArena Korean11871393
LMArena Russian12801415
LMArena Spanish12461448

Instruction Following Qwen3.8 27B leads

Claude 3 Opus: 64.1 (#228), Qwen3.8 27B: 75.8 (#53)

BenchmarkClaude 3 OpusQwen3.8 27B
LMArena Instruction Following12481439
LiveBench Instruction Following63.9%—

Long Context Qwen3.8 27B leads

Claude 3 Opus: 38.2 (#202), Qwen3.8 27B: 44.3 (#70)

BenchmarkClaude 3 OpusQwen3.8 27B
LMArena Longer Query12591450

Writing & Preference Qwen3.8 27B leads

Claude 3 Opus: 47.2 (#213), Qwen3.8 27B: 65.8 (#43)

BenchmarkClaude 3 OpusQwen3.8 27B
LMArena Text12621441
LMArena Creative Writing12351384
LMArena Multi-Turn12751441
EQ-Bench Creative Writing—1671
LiveBench Language50.4%—

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude 3 Opus better than Qwen3.8 27B?

Qwen3.8 27B is the stronger model overall, scoring 46.0 to 29.5 on the Noometry Index.

Is Claude 3 Opus or Qwen3.8 27B better for coding?

Qwen3.8 27B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 50.5 versus 32.9 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Claude 3 Opus and Qwen3.8 27B share?

21 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude 3 Opus has 46 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.8 27B has 31.

Related comparisons

Go deeper