# Claude Opus 5.5 vs Qwen3.6 Flash

> Claude Opus 5.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 68.6 to 38.8 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3.6 Flash costs 19× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 5.5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/claude-opus-5-5-vs-qwen3-6-flash
- Last updated: 2026-10-12
- Shared benchmarks: 9

## Summary

- They share 9 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 5.5 scores higher in 3 categories and Qwen3.6 Flash in 0 categories; 3 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Claude Opus 5.5 leads 91.8 to 39.0.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3): 91.2% for Claude Opus 5.5 and 22.5% for Qwen3.6 Flash.
- Qwen3.6 Flash is cheaper at $0.19 / $1.13 per million input/output tokens, against $4 / $20 for Claude Opus 5.5.

## Snapshot

| | Claude Opus 5.5 | Qwen3.6 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 68.6 | 38.8 |
| Rank | 3 | 182 |
| Context | 1M | 1M |
| Input $/M | $4 | $0.19 |
| Output $/M | $20 | $1.13 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |

## Coding

- Claude Opus 5.5: 71.9 (#3)
- Qwen3.6 Flash: —

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5.5 | Qwen3.6 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| ALE-Bench | 2,147 | 326.4 |
| FrontierCode | 54.6% | — |
| CursorBench | 57.8% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1813 | — |
| FrontierSWE | 62.3% | — |
| SciCode | 66.9% | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1547 | — |
| MirrorCode | 77.4% | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Claude Opus 5.5: 45.3 (#15)
- Qwen3.6 Flash: —

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5.5 | Qwen3.6 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | 73.5% | — |
| GDP.pdf | 30.6% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 9,235 | — |

## Reasoning

- Claude Opus 5.5: 80.2 (#3)
- Qwen3.6 Flash: 29.0 (#96)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5.5 | Qwen3.6 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 71% | 18% |
| DTBench | 98.9% | 77.1% |
| LMCA | 68.2% | 31% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 167.33 | 143.26 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 93.3% | — |
| SimpleBench | — | 35.2% |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 88.5% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 98.5% | — |
| CritPt | 31.7% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 20% |
| EBR-Bench | 71.4% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1535 | — |

## Math

- Claude Opus 5.5: 91.8 (#3)
- Qwen3.6 Flash: 39.0 (#117)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5.5 | Qwen3.6 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 91.2% | 22.5% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 100% | 84.4% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 95% | — |
| ProofBench | 100% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1506 | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 10.3% |
| FrontierMath Erdős | 2.9% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | — | 0% |

## Knowledge

- Claude Opus 5.5: 66.4 (#10)
- Qwen3.6 Flash: 42.1 (#100)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5.5 | Qwen3.6 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 90.6% | 83.3% |
| SimpleQA Verified | 72.2% | 15.9% |
| LMArena Expert | 1547 | — |

## Multimodal

- Claude Opus 5.5: 57.8 (#1)
- Qwen3.6 Flash: —

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5.5 | Qwen3.6 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1321 | — |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | 51.2% | — |
| Furniture Assembly | 83.3% | — |

## Multilingual

- Claude Opus 5.5: 59.1 (#2)
- Qwen3.6 Flash: —

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5.5 | Qwen3.6 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1507 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1588 | — |
| LMArena French | 1514 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1520 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1507 | — |

## Instruction Following

- Claude Opus 5.5: 80.0 (#3)
- Qwen3.6 Flash: —

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5.5 | Qwen3.6 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1537 | — |

## Long Context

- Claude Opus 5.5: 47.1 (#19)
- Qwen3.6 Flash: —

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5.5 | Qwen3.6 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1532 | — |

## Writing & Preference

- Claude Opus 5.5: 78.2 (#3)
- Qwen3.6 Flash: —

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5.5 | Qwen3.6 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1515 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1533 | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 2050 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1499 | — |

## FAQ

### Is Claude Opus 5.5 better than Qwen3.6 Flash?

Claude Opus 5.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 68.6 to 38.8 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3.6 Flash costs 19× 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 Qwen3.6 Flash?

Qwen3.6 Flash is cheaper. It lists at $0.19 per million input tokens and $1.13 per million output tokens; Claude Opus 5.5 lists at $4 and $20.

### Which has the bigger context window?

Both accept 1M tokens.

### How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 5.5 and Qwen3.6 Flash share?

9 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 5.5 has 44 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.6 Flash has 13.