# Claude Sonnet 5.5 vs Qwen3 Coder Next

> Claude Sonnet 5.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 60.5 to 33.8 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3 Coder Next costs 14× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Sonnet 5.5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/claude-sonnet-5-5-vs-qwen3-coder-next
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 2

## Summary

- They share 2 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Sonnet 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 Sonnet 5.5 leads 52.4 to 21.7.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is CritPt: 31.4% for Claude Sonnet 5.5 and 0% for Qwen3 Coder Next.
- Qwen3 Coder Next is cheaper at $0.12 / $0.80 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 Coder Next has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | Claude Sonnet 5.5 | Qwen3 Coder Next |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 60.5 | 33.8 |
| Rank | 10 | 229 |
| Context | 1M | 262K |
| Input $/M | $2 | $0.12 |
| Output $/M | $10 | $0.80 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |

## Coding

- Claude Sonnet 5.5: 65.5 (#6)
- Qwen3 Coder Next: 35.8 (#206)

| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 5.5 | Qwen3 Coder Next |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | 61% | 32.3% |
| FrontierCode | 52.1% | — |
| CursorBench | 55.5% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1699 | — |
| FrontierSWE | 61.9% | — |
| WeirdML | — | 34.4% |
| ALE-Bench | 1,819 | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Claude Sonnet 5.5: 44.9 (#14)
- Qwen3 Coder Next: —

| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 5.5 | Qwen3 Coder Next |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | 75.5% | — |

## Reasoning

- Claude Sonnet 5.5: 52.4 (#29)
- Qwen3 Coder Next: 21.7 (#191)

| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 5.5 | Qwen3 Coder Next |
|---|---|---|
| CritPt | 31.4% | 0% |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 65% | — |

## Math

- Claude Sonnet 5.5: 88.7 (#4)
- Qwen3 Coder Next: —

| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 5.5 | Qwen3 Coder Next |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 88.8% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 80.5% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 100% | — |
| ProofBench | 100% | — |

## Knowledge

- Claude Sonnet 5.5: 66.0 (#11)
- Qwen3 Coder Next: —

| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 5.5 | Qwen3 Coder Next |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 95.6% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | 46.5% | — |

## Multimodal

- Claude Sonnet 5.5: 53.2 (#5)
- Qwen3 Coder Next: —

| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 5.5 | Qwen3 Coder Next |
|---|---|---|
| Furniture Assembly | 75% | — |

## FAQ

### Is Claude Sonnet 5.5 better than Qwen3 Coder Next?

Claude Sonnet 5.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 60.5 to 33.8 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3 Coder Next costs 14× 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 Coder Next?

Qwen3 Coder Next is cheaper. It lists at $0.12 per million input tokens and $0.80 per million output tokens; Claude Sonnet 5.5 lists at $2 and $10.

### Is Claude Sonnet 5.5 or Qwen3 Coder Next better for coding?

Claude Sonnet 5.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 65.5 versus 35.8 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 Coder Next share?

2 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Sonnet 5.5 has 16 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3 Coder Next has 3.