Model comparison
Claude Haiku 5.5 vs Qwen3.6 Flash
Claude Haiku 5.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 49.5 to 38.8 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 5 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 5 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Haiku 5.5 scores higher in 3 categories and Qwen3.6 Flash in 0 categories; 3 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Claude Haiku 5.5 leads 73.6 to 39.0.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3): 75.1% for Claude Haiku 5.5 and 22.5% for Qwen3.6 Flash.
- Claude Haiku 5.5 is cheaper at $0.10 / $0.50 per million input/output tokens, against $0.19 / $1.13 for Qwen3.6 Flash.
Side by side
| Claude Haiku 5.5 | Qwen3.6 Flash | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 49.5 | 38.8 |
| Released | 2026-10-07 | 2026-04-27 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | 1M | 1M |
| Max output | 128K | 66K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.10 | $0.19 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.50 | $1.13 |
| Results tracked | 9 | 13 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Not comparable
Claude Haiku 5.5: 49.2 (#50), Qwen3.6 Flash: —
| Benchmark | Claude Haiku 5.5 | Qwen3.6 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1587 | — |
| ALE-Bench | — | 326.4 |
Reasoning Claude Haiku 5.5 leads
Claude Haiku 5.5: 35.2 (#69), Qwen3.6 Flash: 29.0 (#96)
| Benchmark | Claude Haiku 5.5 | Qwen3.6 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 30% | 18% |
| SimpleBench | — | 35.2% |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 65.7% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 20% |
| DTBench | — | 77.1% |
| LMCA | — | 31% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 143.26 |
Math Claude Haiku 5.5 leads
Claude Haiku 5.5: 73.6 (#18), Qwen3.6 Flash: 39.0 (#117)
| Benchmark | Claude Haiku 5.5 | Qwen3.6 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 75.1% | 22.5% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 98.9% | 84.4% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 46.3% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 10.3% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | — | 0% |
Knowledge Claude Haiku 5.5 leads
Claude Haiku 5.5: 50.8 (#70), Qwen3.6 Flash: 42.1 (#100)
| Benchmark | Claude Haiku 5.5 | Qwen3.6 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 89.6% | 83.3% |
| SimpleQA Verified | 23.8% | 15.9% |
Multimodal Not comparable
Claude Haiku 5.5: 43.7 (#21), Qwen3.6 Flash: —
| Benchmark | Claude Haiku 5.5 | Qwen3.6 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Furniture Assembly | 47.5% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Claude Haiku 5.5 better than Qwen3.6 Flash?
Claude Haiku 5.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 49.5 to 38.8 on the Noometry Index.
Which is cheaper, Claude Haiku 5.5 or Qwen3.6 Flash?
Claude Haiku 5.5 is cheaper. It lists at $0.10 per million input tokens and $0.50 per million output tokens; Qwen3.6 Flash lists at $0.19 and $1.13.
Which has the bigger context window?
Both accept 1M tokens.
How many benchmarks do Claude Haiku 5.5 and Qwen3.6 Flash share?
5 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Haiku 5.5 has 9 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.6 Flash has 13.