# Claude Opus 5.5 vs Qwen3 Max

> Claude Opus 5.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 68.5 to 43.5 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3 Max costs 3.3× 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-max
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 19

## Summary

- They share 19 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 5.5 scores higher in 8 categories and Qwen3 Max in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Claude Opus 5.5 leads 79.5 to 22.0.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3): 91.2% for Claude Opus 5.5 and 18.9% for Qwen3 Max.
- Qwen3 Max is cheaper at $1.20 / $6 per million input/output tokens, against $4 / $20 for Claude Opus 5.5.
- Claude Opus 5.5 accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 262K.

## Snapshot

| | Claude Opus 5.5 | Qwen3 Max |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 68.5 | 43.5 |
| Rank | 3 | 82 |
| Context | 1M | 262K |
| Input $/M | $4 | $1.20 |
| Output $/M | $20 | $6 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |

## Coding

- Claude Opus 5.5: 71.4 (#1)
- Qwen3 Max: 42.4 (#93)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5.5 | Qwen3 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1545 | 1456 |
| FrontierCode | 54.4% | — |
| CursorBench | 57.8% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1820 | — |
| FrontierSWE | 62.3% | — |
| SciCode | 66.9% | — |
| MirrorCode | 77.4% | — |
| ALE-Bench | — | 370.45 |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Claude Opus 5.5: 45.3 (#13)
- Qwen3 Max: —

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5.5 | Qwen3 Max |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | 73.5% | — |
| GDP.pdf | 30.6% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | — | 71.56 |

## Reasoning

- Claude Opus 5.5: 79.5 (#2)
- Qwen3 Max: 22.0 (#186)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5.5 | Qwen3 Max |
|---|---|---|
| NYT Connections (extended) | 88.5% | 30.1% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1545 | 1448 |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 71% | 5% |
| DTBench | 98.9% | 82.1% |
| LMCA | 68.2% | 28.3% |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 92.5% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 72.5% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 97.5% | — |
| CritPt | 31.7% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 4% |
| EBR-Bench | 71.4% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 142.41 |

## Math

- Claude Opus 5.5: 92.4 (#2)
- Qwen3 Max: 37.6 (#94)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5.5 | Qwen3 Max |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 91.2% | 18.9% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 100% | 73.3% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 95% | — |
| ProofBench | 100% | — |
| LMArena Math | — | 1447 |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 97.1% |

## Knowledge

- Claude Opus 5.5: 66.6 (#9)
- Qwen3 Max: 48.1 (#72)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5.5 | Qwen3 Max |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 90.6% | 72.6% |
| SimpleQA Verified | 72.2% | 48.7% |
| LMArena Expert | 1564 | 1457 |

## Multimodal

- Claude Opus 5.5: 56.5 (#2)
- Qwen3 Max: —

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5.5 | Qwen3 Max |
|---|---|---|
| Furniture Assembly | 83.3% | — |

## Multilingual

- Claude Opus 5.5: 59.8 (#1)
- Qwen3 Max: 53.9 (#58)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5.5 | Qwen3 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1513 | 1429 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1572 | 1479 |
| LMArena Russian | 1532 | 1428 |
| LMArena French | — | 1450 |
| LMArena German | — | 1463 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1399 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1397 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1463 |

## Instruction Following

- Claude Opus 5.5: 80.1 (#2)
- Qwen3 Max: 75.0 (#81)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5.5 | Qwen3 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1535 | 1420 |

## Long Context

- Claude Opus 5.5: 47.3 (#18)
- Qwen3 Max: 41.6 (#129)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5.5 | Qwen3 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1540 | 1439 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 66.7% |
| CL-bench | — | 14.5% |

## Writing & Preference

- Claude Opus 5.5: 78.7 (#3)
- Qwen3 Max: 62.6 (#72)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5.5 | Qwen3 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1518 | 1439 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1538 | 1401 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1520 | 1446 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 2050 | — |

## FAQ

### Is Claude Opus 5.5 better than Qwen3 Max?

Claude Opus 5.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 68.5 to 43.5 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3 Max costs 3.3× 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 Max?

Qwen3 Max is cheaper. It lists at $1.20 per million input tokens and $6 per million output tokens; Claude Opus 5.5 lists at $4 and $20.

### Is Claude Opus 5.5 or Qwen3 Max better for coding?

Claude Opus 5.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 71.4 versus 42.4 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 Max share?

19 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 5.5 has 35 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3 Max has 33.