Model comparison

Claude Opus 4.5 vs Qwen3 Coder Next

Claude Opus 4.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.5 to 34.3 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3 Coder Next costs 34× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 4.5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 1 shared benchmarks.

Claude Opus 4.5 Anthropic

50.5

Rank #47 Confirmed

Qwen3 Coder Next Alibaba (Qwen)

34.3

Rank #232 Reported

Summary

  • They share 1 benchmark with published results for both. Claude Opus 4.5 scores higher in 2 categories and Qwen3 Coder Next in 0 categories; 2 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where Claude Opus 4.5 leads 42.6 to 22.4.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is WeirdML: 63.7% for Claude Opus 4.5 and 34.4% for Qwen3 Coder Next.
  • Qwen3 Coder Next is cheaper at $0.12 / $0.80 per million input/output tokens, against $5 / $25 for Claude Opus 4.5.
  • Qwen3 Coder Next accepts more context: 262K tokens versus 200K.
  • Qwen3 Coder Next has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Claude Opus 4.5 and Qwen3 Coder Next specifications
Claude Opus 4.5Qwen3 Coder Next
ProviderAnthropicAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index50.534.3
Released2025-11-012026-02-02
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window200K262K
Max output64K66K
Input $ / M tokens$5$0.12
Output $ / M tokens$25$0.80
Results tracked693

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

Category by category

Coding Claude Opus 4.5 leads

Claude Opus 4.5: 54.8 (#27), Qwen3 Coder Next: 36.3 (#210)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Qwen3 Coder Next
WeirdML63.7%34.4%
SWE-bench Verified76.7%—
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)76.8%—
LMArena WebDev1494—
SWE-bench Multilingual70.7%—
SciCode—32.3%
GSO26.5%—
LMArena Coding1504—
ALE-Bench1,025—
AlgoTune1.77—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.5: 47.3 (#12), Qwen3 Coder Next: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Qwen3 Coder Next
Terminal-Bench63.1%—
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard77.5%—
GDPval45.5%—
Remote Labor Index3.8%—
τ²-bench Airline84%—
τ²-bench Banking24.7%—
τ²-bench Retail79.6%—
τ²-bench Telecom92.3%—
Cybench82%—
DeepResearch Bench54.8%—
OSWorld66.3%—
BALROG43.5%—
LMArena Search1180—
METR Time Horizons75%—
Vending-Bench 24,967—

Reasoning Claude Opus 4.5 leads

Claude Opus 4.5: 42.6 (#51), Qwen3 Coder Next: 22.4 (#196)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Qwen3 Coder Next
ARC-AGI-237.6%—
SimpleBench62%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark80.2%—
NYT Connections (extended)52.5%—
ARC-AGI-180%—
CritPt—0%
Chess Puzzles12%—
EnigmaEval11.9%—
EBR-Bench14.3%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1476—
Mystery Game Puzzles22%—
DTBench89.9%—
LMCA44.5%—
Epoch Capabilities Index150.09—
ForecastBench60.7—

Math Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.5: 38.6 (#132), Qwen3 Coder Next: —

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Qwen3 Coder Next
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)34.4%—
FrontierMath Tier 44.9%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202586.1%—
ProofBench36%—
LMArena Math1463—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)20.7%—
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)4.2%—

Knowledge Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.5: 56.5 (#44), Qwen3 Coder Next: —

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Qwen3 Coder Next
GPQA Diamond86%—
Humanity's Last Exam25.2%—
SimpleQA Verified45.7%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate10.9%—
LMArena Expert1487—

Multimodal Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.5: 31.4 (#107), Qwen3 Coder Next: —

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Qwen3 Coder Next
GeoBench75%—
VPCT40%—
Furniture Assembly28.3%—
LMArena Document1462—

Multilingual Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.5: 54.3 (#47), Qwen3 Coder Next: —

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Qwen3 Coder Next
LMArena Non-English1438—
LMArena Chinese1470—
LMArena French1471—
LMArena German1449—
LMArena Japanese1416—
LMArena Korean1424—
LMArena Russian1447—
LMArena Spanish1458—

Instruction Following Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.5: 77.5 (#19), Qwen3 Coder Next: —

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Qwen3 Coder Next
LMArena Instruction Following1478—

Long Context Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.5: 46.5 (#22), Qwen3 Coder Next: —

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Qwen3 Coder Next
CL-bench21.1%—
LMArena Longer Query1480—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.5: 68.1 (#28), Qwen3 Coder Next: —

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Qwen3 Coder Next
LMArena Text1451—
LMArena Creative Writing1445—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1687—
LMArena Multi-Turn1466—

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Opus 4.5 better than Qwen3 Coder Next?

Claude Opus 4.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.5 to 34.3 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3 Coder Next costs 34× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 4.5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.5 or Qwen3 Coder Next?

Qwen3 Coder Next is cheaper. It lists at $0.12 per million input tokens and $0.80 per million output tokens; Claude Opus 4.5 lists at $5 and $25.

Is Claude Opus 4.5 or Qwen3 Coder Next better for coding?

Claude Opus 4.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 54.8 versus 36.3 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen3 Coder Next does, with 262K tokens against 200K.

How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 4.5 and Qwen3 Coder Next share?

1 benchmark has published results for both models. Claude Opus 4.5 has 69 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3 Coder Next has 3.

Related comparisons

Go deeper