Noometry

Model comparison

Claude Opus 5.5 vs Qwen3 Coder Next

Claude Opus 5.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 68.6 to 34.3 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3 Coder Next costs 28× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 5.5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 2 shared benchmarks.

Claude Opus 5.5 Anthropic

68.6

Rank #3 Confirmed

Qwen3 Coder Next Alibaba (Qwen)

34.3

Rank #232 Reported

Summary

  • They share 2 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 5.5 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 5.5 leads 80.2 to 22.4.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is SciCode: 66.9% for Claude Opus 5.5 and 32.3% for Qwen3 Coder Next.
  • Qwen3 Coder Next is cheaper at $0.12 / $0.80 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 Coder Next has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Claude Opus 5.5Qwen3 Coder Next
ProviderAnthropicAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index68.634.3
Released2026-09-222026-02-02
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1M262K
Max output128K66K
Input $ / M tokens$4$0.12
Output $ / M tokens$20$0.80
Results tracked443

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 Coder Next: 36.3 (#210)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen3 Coder Next
SciCode66.9%32.3%
FrontierCode54.6%—
CursorBench57.8%—
LMArena WebDev1813—
FrontierSWE62.3%—
WeirdML—34.4%
LMArena Coding1547—
MirrorCode77.4%—
ALE-Bench2,147—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Claude Opus 5.5: 45.3 (#15), Qwen3 Coder Next: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen3 Coder Next
APEX-Agents73.5%—
GDP.pdf30.6%—
Vending-Bench 29,235—

Reasoning Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 80.2 (#3), Qwen3 Coder Next: 22.4 (#196)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen3 Coder Next
CritPt31.7%0%
ARC-AGI-293.3%—
NYT Connections (extended)88.5%—
ARC-AGI-198.5%—
EBR-Bench71.4%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1535—
Mystery Game Puzzles71%—
DTBench98.9%—
LMCA68.2%—
Epoch Capabilities Index167.33—

Math Not comparable

Claude Opus 5.5: 91.8 (#3), Qwen3 Coder Next: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen3 Coder Next
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)91.2%—
FrontierMath Tier 495%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025100%—
ProofBench100%—
LMArena Math1506—
FrontierMath Erdős2.9%—

Knowledge Not comparable

Claude Opus 5.5: 66.4 (#10), Qwen3 Coder Next: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen3 Coder Next
GPQA Diamond90.6%—
SimpleQA Verified72.2%—
LMArena Expert1547—

Multimodal Not comparable

Claude Opus 5.5: 57.8 (#1), Qwen3 Coder Next: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen3 Coder Next
LMArena Vision1321—
Blueprint-Bench 251.2%—
Furniture Assembly83.3%—

Multilingual Not comparable

Claude Opus 5.5: 59.1 (#2), Qwen3 Coder Next: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen3 Coder Next
LMArena Non-English1507—
LMArena Chinese1588—
LMArena French1514—
LMArena Russian1520—
LMArena Spanish1507—

Instruction Following Not comparable

Claude Opus 5.5: 80.0 (#3), Qwen3 Coder Next: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen3 Coder Next
LMArena Instruction Following1537—

Long Context Not comparable

Claude Opus 5.5: 47.1 (#19), Qwen3 Coder Next: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen3 Coder Next
LMArena Longer Query1532—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Claude Opus 5.5: 78.2 (#3), Qwen3 Coder Next: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen3 Coder Next
LMArena Text1515—
LMArena Creative Writing1533—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing2050—
LMArena Multi-Turn1499—

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Opus 5.5 better than Qwen3 Coder Next?

Claude Opus 5.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 68.6 to 34.3 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3 Coder Next costs 28× 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 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 5.5 lists at $4 and $20.

Is Claude Opus 5.5 or Qwen3 Coder Next better for coding?

Claude Opus 5.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 71.9 versus 36.3 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 Coder Next share?

2 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 5.5 has 44 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3 Coder Next has 3.

Related comparisons

Go deeper