Model comparison

Claude Sonnet 5.5 vs Qwen3.5-9B

Claude Sonnet 5.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 60.5 to 33.3 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3.5-9B costs 36× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Sonnet 5.5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 4 shared benchmarks.

Claude Sonnet 5.5 Anthropic

60.5

Rank #10 Confirmed

Qwen3.5-9B Alibaba (Qwen)

33.3

Rank #235 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 4 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Sonnet 5.5 scores higher in 5 categories and Qwen3.5-9B in 0 categories; 5 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where Claude Sonnet 5.5 leads 88.7 to 33.5.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 100% for Claude Sonnet 5.5 and 61.7% for Qwen3.5-9B.
  • Qwen3.5-9B is cheaper at $0.10 / $0.15 per million input/output tokens, against $2 / $10 for Claude Sonnet 5.5.
  • Claude Sonnet 5.5 accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 262K.
  • Qwen3.5-9B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Claude Sonnet 5.5 and Qwen3.5-9B specifications
Claude Sonnet 5.5Qwen3.5-9B
ProviderAnthropicAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index60.533.3
Released2026-09-282026-02-23
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1M262K
Max output128K66K
Input $ / M tokens$2$0.10
Output $ / M tokens$10$0.15
Results tracked1610

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

Category by category

Coding Claude Sonnet 5.5 leads

Claude Sonnet 5.5: 65.5 (#6), Qwen3.5-9B: 35.3 (#213)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 5.5Qwen3.5-9B
SciCode61%27.5%
FrontierCode52.1%—
CursorBench55.5%—
LMArena WebDev1699—
FrontierSWE61.9%—
ALE-Bench1,819—

Agentic & Tool Use Claude Sonnet 5.5 leads

Claude Sonnet 5.5: 44.9 (#14), Qwen3.5-9B: 14.4 (#143)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 5.5Qwen3.5-9B
Terminal-Bench—9.2%
APEX-Agents75.5%—

Reasoning Claude Sonnet 5.5 leads

Claude Sonnet 5.5: 52.4 (#29), Qwen3.5-9B: 22.5 (#178)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 5.5Qwen3.5-9B
CritPt31.4%0.3%
Chess Puzzles—12%
Mystery Game Puzzles65%—
DTBench—71.2%
LMCA—24.5%
Epoch Capabilities Index—139.45

Math Claude Sonnet 5.5 leads

Claude Sonnet 5.5: 88.7 (#4), Qwen3.5-9B: 33.5 (#174)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 5.5Qwen3.5-9B
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025100%61.7%
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)88.8%—
FrontierMath Tier 480.5%—
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions—48.5%
ProofBench100%—

Knowledge Claude Sonnet 5.5 leads

Claude Sonnet 5.5: 66.0 (#11), Qwen3.5-9B: 46.0 (#77)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 5.5Qwen3.5-9B
GPQA Diamond95.6%79%
SimpleQA Verified46.5%—

Multimodal Not comparable

Claude Sonnet 5.5: 53.2 (#5), Qwen3.5-9B: —

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 5.5Qwen3.5-9B
Furniture Assembly75%—

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Sonnet 5.5 better than Qwen3.5-9B?

Claude Sonnet 5.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 60.5 to 33.3 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3.5-9B costs 36× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Sonnet 5.5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, Claude Sonnet 5.5 or Qwen3.5-9B?

Qwen3.5-9B is cheaper. It lists at $0.10 per million input tokens and $0.15 per million output tokens; Claude Sonnet 5.5 lists at $2 and $10.

Is Claude Sonnet 5.5 or Qwen3.5-9B better for coding?

Claude Sonnet 5.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 65.5 versus 35.3 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

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

How many benchmarks do Claude Sonnet 5.5 and Qwen3.5-9B share?

4 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Sonnet 5.5 has 16 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.5-9B has 10.

Related comparisons

Go deeper