Noometry

Model comparison

Claude Opus 4.1 vs Qwen3.6 Flash

Claude Opus 4.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.0 to 38.8 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3.6 Flash costs 71× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 4.1's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 12 shared benchmarks.

Claude Opus 4.1 Anthropic

41.0

Rank #142 Confirmed

Qwen3.6 Flash Alibaba (Qwen)

38.8

Rank #182 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 4.1 scores higher in 1 category and Qwen3.6 Flash in 2 categories; 2 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where Qwen3.6 Flash leads 39.0 to 22.3.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is SimpleBench: 60% for Claude Opus 4.1 and 35.2% for Qwen3.6 Flash.
  • Qwen3.6 Flash is cheaper at $0.19 / $1.13 per million input/output tokens, against $15 / $75 for Claude Opus 4.1.
  • Qwen3.6 Flash accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 200K.

Side by side

Claude Opus 4.1Qwen3.6 Flash
ProviderAnthropicAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index41.038.8
Released2025-08-052026-04-27
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
Context window200K1M
Max output32K66K
Input $ / M tokens$15$0.19
Output $ / M tokens$75$1.13
Results tracked4813

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

Category by category

Coding Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.1: 44.4 (#73), Qwen3.6 Flash: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Qwen3.6 Flash
ALE-Bench674.77326.4
SWE-bench Verified73.3%—
LMArena WebDev1390—
WeirdML45.9%—
LMArena Coding1479—
AlgoTune1.34—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.1: 35.0 (#41), Qwen3.6 Flash: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Qwen3.6 Flash
Terminal-Bench38%—
GDPval43.6%—
Cybench42%—
DeepResearch Bench48.3%—
LMArena Search1148—
METR Time Horizons66.8%—

Reasoning Claude Opus 4.1 leads

Claude Opus 4.1: 32.2 (#76), Qwen3.6 Flash: 29.0 (#96)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Qwen3.6 Flash
SimpleBench60%35.2%
Chess Puzzles7%20%
Mystery Game Puzzles21%18%
DTBench80%77.1%
LMCA37.1%31%
Epoch Capabilities Index144.12143.26
EnigmaEval7.2%—
EBR-Bench7.9%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1443—
ForecastBench62—

Math Qwen3.6 Flash leads

Claude Opus 4.1: 22.3 (#277), Qwen3.6 Flash: 39.0 (#117)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Qwen3.6 Flash
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)12.6%22.5%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202568.9%84.4%
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)7.2%10.3%
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)4.2%0%
FrontierMath Tier 42.4%—
LMArena Math1431—

Knowledge Too close to call

Claude Opus 4.1: 42.0 (#101), Qwen3.6 Flash: 42.1 (#100)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Qwen3.6 Flash
GPQA Diamond77.3%83.3%
Humanity's Last Exam11.5%—
SimpleQA Verified—15.9%
Confabulations17.1%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate11.8%—
LMArena Expert1439—

Multimodal Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.1: 26.8 (#119), Qwen3.6 Flash: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Qwen3.6 Flash
VPCT35%—

Multilingual Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.1: 52.0 (#95), Qwen3.6 Flash: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Qwen3.6 Flash
LMArena Non-English1405—
LMArena Chinese1427—
LMArena French1431—
LMArena German1413—
LMArena Japanese1378—
LMArena Korean1380—
LMArena Russian1422—
LMArena Spanish1448—

Instruction Following Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.1: 75.6 (#58), Qwen3.6 Flash: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Qwen3.6 Flash
LMArena Instruction Following1435—

Long Context Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.1: 44.5 (#63), Qwen3.6 Flash: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Qwen3.6 Flash
LMArena Longer Query1455—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.1: 62.4 (#74), Qwen3.6 Flash: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Qwen3.6 Flash
LMArena Text1419—
LMArena Creative Writing1412—
Short-Story Creative Writing84.7%—
LMArena Multi-Turn1444—

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Opus 4.1 better than Qwen3.6 Flash?

Claude Opus 4.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.0 to 38.8 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3.6 Flash costs 71× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 4.1's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.1 or Qwen3.6 Flash?

Qwen3.6 Flash is cheaper. It lists at $0.19 per million input tokens and $1.13 per million output tokens; Claude Opus 4.1 lists at $15 and $75.

Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen3.6 Flash does, with 1M tokens against 200K.

How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 4.1 and Qwen3.6 Flash share?

12 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 4.1 has 48 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.6 Flash has 13.

Related comparisons

Go deeper