# Claude Opus 4.1 vs Qwen3.6 Plus

> Qwen3.6 Plus is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.5 to 41.0 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/claude-opus-4-1-vs-qwen3-6-plus
- Last updated: 2026-10-12
- Shared benchmarks: 30

## Summary

- They share 30 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 4.1 scores higher in 4 categories and Qwen3.6 Plus in 4 categories; 5 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Qwen3.6 Plus leads 51.8 to 22.3.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3): 12.6% for Claude Opus 4.1 and 38.2% for Qwen3.6 Plus.
- Qwen3.6 Plus is cheaper at $0.50 / $3 per million input/output tokens, against $15 / $75 for Claude Opus 4.1.
- Qwen3.6 Plus accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 200K.

## Snapshot

| | Claude Opus 4.1 | Qwen3.6 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 41.0 | 47.5 |
| Rank | 142 | 62 |
| Context | 200K | 1M |
| Input $/M | $15 | $0.50 |
| Output $/M | $75 | $3 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |

## Coding

- Claude Opus 4.1: 44.4 (#73)
- Qwen3.6 Plus: 40.8 (#130)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | Qwen3.6 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench Verified | 73.3% | 57.9% |
| LMArena WebDev | 1390 | 1461 |
| LMArena Coding | 1479 | 1467 |
| ALE-Bench | 674.77 | 670.15 |
| SciCode | — | 40.7% |
| WeirdML | 45.9% | — |
| AlgoTune | 1.34 | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Claude Opus 4.1: 35.0 (#41)
- Qwen3.6 Plus: —

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | Qwen3.6 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | 38% | — |
| GDPval | 43.6% | — |
| Cybench | 42% | — |
| DeepResearch Bench | 48.3% | — |
| LMArena Search | 1148 | — |
| METR Time Horizons | 66.8% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | — | 5,115 |

## Reasoning

- Claude Opus 4.1: 32.2 (#76)
- Qwen3.6 Plus: 29.3 (#93)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | Qwen3.6 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| Chess Puzzles | 7% | 17% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1443 | 1449 |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 21% | 12% |
| DTBench | 80% | 81.9% |
| LMCA | 37.1% | 33.1% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 144.12 | 147.65 |
| SimpleBench | 60% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 60.3% |
| CritPt | — | 2.9% |
| EnigmaEval | 7.2% | — |
| Thematic Generalization | — | 59.5% |
| EBR-Bench | 7.9% | — |
| ForecastBench | 62 | — |

## Math

- Claude Opus 4.1: 22.3 (#277)
- Qwen3.6 Plus: 51.8 (#54)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | Qwen3.6 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 12.6% | 38.2% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 68.9% | 93.3% |
| LMArena Math | 1431 | 1450 |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 7.2% | 26.2% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 4.2% | 8.3% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 2.4% | — |

## Knowledge

- Claude Opus 4.1: 42.0 (#101)
- Qwen3.6 Plus: 56.1 (#45)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | Qwen3.6 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 77.3% | 88.4% |
| LMArena Expert | 1439 | 1454 |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 11.5% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 44.1% |
| Confabulations | 17.1% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 11.8% | — |

## Multimodal

- Claude Opus 4.1: 26.8 (#119)
- Qwen3.6 Plus: —

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | Qwen3.6 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| VPCT | 35% | — |

## Multilingual

- Claude Opus 4.1: 52.0 (#95)
- Qwen3.6 Plus: 53.3 (#70)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | Qwen3.6 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1405 | 1424 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1427 | 1477 |
| LMArena French | 1431 | 1455 |
| LMArena German | 1413 | 1452 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1378 | 1389 |
| LMArena Korean | 1380 | 1379 |
| LMArena Russian | 1422 | 1434 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1448 | 1432 |

## Instruction Following

- Claude Opus 4.1: 75.6 (#58)
- Qwen3.6 Plus: 75.0 (#74)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | Qwen3.6 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1435 | 1425 |

## Long Context

- Claude Opus 4.1: 44.5 (#63)
- Qwen3.6 Plus: 45.2 (#49)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | Qwen3.6 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1455 | 1439 |
| CL-bench | — | 20.3% |

## Writing & Preference

- Claude Opus 4.1: 62.4 (#74)
- Qwen3.6 Plus: 62.2 (#82)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | Qwen3.6 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1419 | 1437 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1412 | 1404 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1444 | 1438 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 84.7% | — |

## FAQ

### Is Claude Opus 4.1 better than Qwen3.6 Plus?

Qwen3.6 Plus is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.5 to 41.0 on the Noometry Index.

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

Qwen3.6 Plus is cheaper. It lists at $0.50 per million input tokens and $3 per million output tokens; Claude Opus 4.1 lists at $15 and $75.

### Is Claude Opus 4.1 or Qwen3.6 Plus better for coding?

Claude Opus 4.1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 44.4 versus 40.8 in the Noometry coding category.

### Which has the bigger context window?

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

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

30 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 4.1 has 48 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.6 Plus has 37.