Noometry

Model comparison

Claude Opus 5.5 vs Qwen3.8 27B

Claude Opus 5.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 68.6 to 46.0 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3.8 27B costs 7.2× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 5.5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 27 shared benchmarks.

Claude Opus 5.5 Anthropic

68.6

Rank #3 Confirmed

Qwen3.8 27B Alibaba (Qwen)

46.0

Rank #68 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 27 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 5.5 scores higher in 10 categories and Qwen3.8 27B in 0 categories; 10 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where Claude Opus 5.5 leads 91.8 to 37.1.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is ProofBench: 100% for Claude Opus 5.5 and 16% for Qwen3.8 27B.
  • Qwen3.8 27B is cheaper at $0.99 / $1.49 per million input/output tokens, against $4 / $20 for Claude Opus 5.5.
  • Claude Opus 5.5 accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 262K.
  • Qwen3.8 27B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Claude Opus 5.5Qwen3.8 27B
ProviderAnthropicAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index68.646.0
Released2026-09-222026-08-14
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1M262K
Max output128K33K
Input $ / M tokens$4$0.99
Output $ / M tokens$20$1.49
Results tracked4431

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

Category by category

Coding Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 71.9 (#3), Qwen3.8 27B: 50.5 (#44)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen3.8 27B
LMArena WebDev18131593
SciCode66.9%46.6%
LMArena Coding15471482
FrontierCode54.6%—
CursorBench57.8%—
FrontierSWE62.3%—
MirrorCode77.4%—
ALE-Bench2,147—

Agentic & Tool Use Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 45.3 (#15), Qwen3.8 27B: 32.9 (#57)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen3.8 27B
APEX-Agents73.5%47.5%
GDP.pdf30.6%—
Vending-Bench 29,235—

Reasoning Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 80.2 (#3), Qwen3.8 27B: 41.0 (#54)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen3.8 27B
ARC-AGI-293.3%42.4%
NYT Connections (extended)88.5%54.5%
ARC-AGI-198.5%87.5%
CritPt31.7%5.4%
LMArena Hard Prompts15351460
DTBench98.9%88%
LMCA68.2%41.4%
Epoch Capabilities Index167.33149.38
EBR-Bench71.4%—
Mystery Game Puzzles71%—
Surface Evolver Bench—45%

Math Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 91.8 (#3), Qwen3.8 27B: 37.1 (#161)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen3.8 27B
ProofBench100%16%
LMArena Math15061456
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)91.2%—
FrontierMath Tier 495%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025100%—
FrontierMath Erdős2.9%—

Knowledge Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 66.4 (#10), Qwen3.8 27B: 41.6 (#109)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen3.8 27B
LMArena Expert15471482
GPQA Diamond90.6%—
SimpleQA Verified72.2%—

Multimodal Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 57.8 (#1), Qwen3.8 27B: 41.3 (#37)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen3.8 27B
LMArena Vision13211271
Blueprint-Bench 251.2%—
Furniture Assembly83.3%—

Multilingual Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 59.1 (#2), Qwen3.8 27B: 53.7 (#60)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen3.8 27B
LMArena Non-English15071430
LMArena Chinese15881504
LMArena French15141465
LMArena Russian15201415
LMArena Spanish15071448
LMArena German—1438
LMArena Japanese—1384
LMArena Korean—1393

Instruction Following Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 80.0 (#3), Qwen3.8 27B: 75.8 (#53)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen3.8 27B
LMArena Instruction Following15371439

Long Context Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 47.1 (#19), Qwen3.8 27B: 44.3 (#70)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen3.8 27B
LMArena Longer Query15321450

Writing & Preference Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 78.2 (#3), Qwen3.8 27B: 65.8 (#43)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen3.8 27B
LMArena Text15151441
LMArena Creative Writing15331384
EQ-Bench Creative Writing20501671
LMArena Multi-Turn14991441

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Opus 5.5 better than Qwen3.8 27B?

Claude Opus 5.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 68.6 to 46.0 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3.8 27B costs 7.2× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 5.5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 5.5 or Qwen3.8 27B?

Qwen3.8 27B is cheaper. It lists at $0.99 per million input tokens and $1.49 per million output tokens; Claude Opus 5.5 lists at $4 and $20.

Is Claude Opus 5.5 or Qwen3.8 27B better for coding?

Claude Opus 5.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 71.9 versus 50.5 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Claude Opus 5.5 does, with 1M tokens against 262K.

How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 5.5 and Qwen3.8 27B share?

27 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 5.5 has 44 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.8 27B has 31.

Related comparisons

Go deeper