Price Per TokenPrice Per Token
Anthropic
Anthropic
vs
Qwen
Qwen

Claude Opus 4.6 vs Qwen3.5 397B A17B

A detailed comparison of pricing, benchmarks, and capabilities

Get our weekly newsletter on pricing changes, new releases, and tools.

Join the Price Per Token Community

Key Takeaways

Claude Opus 4.6 wins:

  • Larger context window
  • Higher intelligence benchmark
  • Better at coding
  • Has reasoning mode

Qwen3.5 397B A17B wins:

  • Cheaper input tokens
  • Cheaper output tokens
  • Faster response time
Price Advantage
Qwen3.5 397B A17B
Benchmark Advantage
Claude Opus 4.6
Context Window
Claude Opus 4.6
Speed
Qwen3.5 397B A17B

Pricing Comparison

Benchmark Comparison

Context & Performance

Capabilities

Feature Comparison

FeatureClaude Opus 4.6Qwen3.5 397B A17B
Vision (Image Input)
Tool/Function Calls
Reasoning Mode
Audio Input
Audio Output
PDF Input
Prompt Caching
Web Search

License & Release

PropertyClaude Opus 4.6Qwen3.5 397B A17B
LicenseProprietaryOpen Source
AuthorAnthropicQwen
ReleasedFeb 2026Feb 2026

Claude Opus 4.6 Modalities

Input
textimage
Output
text

Qwen3.5 397B A17B Modalities

Input
textimagevideo
Output
text

Frequently Asked Questions

Qwen3.5 397B A17B has cheaper input pricing at $0.39/M tokens. Qwen3.5 397B A17B has cheaper output pricing at $0.90/M tokens.
Claude Opus 4.6 scores higher on coding benchmarks with a score of 47.6, compared to Qwen3.5 397B A17B's score of 37.4.
Claude Opus 4.6 has a 1,000,000 token context window, while Qwen3.5 397B A17B has a 262,144 token context window.
Claude Opus 4.6 supports vision. Qwen3.5 397B A17B supports vision.