Noometry

Model comparison

Claude Opus 5.5 vs Qwen3.8 Flash

Claude Opus 5.5 has enough public results to be ranked (#3); Qwen3.8 Flash does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.

Last verified . 1 shared benchmarks.

Claude Opus 5.5 Anthropic

68.6

Rank #3 Confirmed

Qwen3.8 Flash Alibaba (Qwen)

35.5

Unranked Sparse

Summary

  • They share 1 benchmark with published results for both. Claude Opus 5.5 scores higher in 1 category and Qwen3.8 Flash in 0 categories; one gap is clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in agentic & tool use, where Claude Opus 5.5 leads 45.3 to 31.3.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is GDP.pdf: 30.6% for Claude Opus 5.5 and 16.6% for Qwen3.8 Flash.
  • Qwen3.8 Flash is cheaper at $0.15 / $0.47 per million input/output tokens, against $4 / $20 for Claude Opus 5.5.

Side by side

Claude Opus 5.5Qwen3.8 Flash
ProviderAnthropicAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index68.635.5
Released2026-09-222026-08-26
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
Context window1M1M
Max output128K131K
Input $ / M tokens$4$0.15
Output $ / M tokens$20$0.47
Results tracked441

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding Not comparable

Claude Opus 5.5: 71.9 (#3), Qwen3.8 Flash: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen3.8 Flash
FrontierCode54.6%—
CursorBench57.8%—
LMArena WebDev1813—
FrontierSWE62.3%—
SciCode66.9%—
LMArena Coding1547—
MirrorCode77.4%—
ALE-Bench2,147—

Agentic & Tool Use Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 45.3 (#15), Qwen3.8 Flash: 31.3

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen3.8 Flash
GDP.pdf30.6%16.6%
APEX-Agents73.5%—
Vending-Bench 29,235—

Reasoning Not comparable

Claude Opus 5.5: 80.2 (#3), Qwen3.8 Flash: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen3.8 Flash
ARC-AGI-293.3%—
NYT Connections (extended)88.5%—
ARC-AGI-198.5%—
CritPt31.7%—
EBR-Bench71.4%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1535—
Mystery Game Puzzles71%—
DTBench98.9%—
LMCA68.2%—
Epoch Capabilities Index167.33—

Math Not comparable

Claude Opus 5.5: 91.8 (#3), Qwen3.8 Flash: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen3.8 Flash
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)91.2%—
FrontierMath Tier 495%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025100%—
ProofBench100%—
LMArena Math1506—
FrontierMath Erdős2.9%—

Knowledge Not comparable

Claude Opus 5.5: 66.4 (#10), Qwen3.8 Flash: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen3.8 Flash
GPQA Diamond90.6%—
SimpleQA Verified72.2%—
LMArena Expert1547—

Multimodal Not comparable

Claude Opus 5.5: 57.8 (#1), Qwen3.8 Flash: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen3.8 Flash
LMArena Vision1321—
Blueprint-Bench 251.2%—
Furniture Assembly83.3%—

Multilingual Not comparable

Claude Opus 5.5: 59.1 (#2), Qwen3.8 Flash: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen3.8 Flash
LMArena Non-English1507—
LMArena Chinese1588—
LMArena French1514—
LMArena Russian1520—
LMArena Spanish1507—

Instruction Following Not comparable

Claude Opus 5.5: 80.0 (#3), Qwen3.8 Flash: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen3.8 Flash
LMArena Instruction Following1537—

Long Context Not comparable

Claude Opus 5.5: 47.1 (#19), Qwen3.8 Flash: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen3.8 Flash
LMArena Longer Query1532—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Claude Opus 5.5: 78.2 (#3), Qwen3.8 Flash: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Qwen3.8 Flash
LMArena Text1515—
LMArena Creative Writing1533—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing2050—
LMArena Multi-Turn1499—

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Opus 5.5 better than Qwen3.8 Flash?

Claude Opus 5.5 has enough public results to be ranked (#3); Qwen3.8 Flash does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.

Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 5.5 or Qwen3.8 Flash?

Qwen3.8 Flash is cheaper. It lists at $0.15 per million input tokens and $0.47 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 Qwen3.8 Flash share?

1 benchmark has published results for both models. Claude Opus 5.5 has 44 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.8 Flash has 1.

Related comparisons

Go deeper