Claude 3.5 Haiku vs Qwen3 235B A22B
Qwen3 235B A22B leads the LLM Stats Score 15.7 to 5.3. Qwen3 235B A22B is 16.0x cheaper per token.
Anthropic · Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team · Updated for 2026
Which is better?
Qwen3 235B A22B leads the overall LLM Stats Score 15.7 to 5.3, ranking #217 overall.
In the 4 individual benchmarks reported for both models, Qwen3 235B A22B wins 3; this is a narrower head-to-head signal than the composite indexes.
On price, Qwen3 235B A22B is roughly 16.0x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.
Claude 3.5 Haiku also accepts a larger context window (200,000 input tokens), making it the stronger choice for long documents and large codebases.
Based on current LLM Stats indexes, shared benchmarks, pricing, and model metadata for 2026.
Choose Claude 3.5 Haiku
- you process long inputs — it offers a 200,000 token context window
Choose Qwen3 235B A22B
- overall performance matters — it scores 15.7 and ranks #217 on LLM Stats
- your work emphasizes reasoning — it leads those capability indexes
- you value its reported benchmark strengths — it wins 3 of 4 exact shared results
- cost matters — it's about 16.0x cheaper per token
- you want the most recent training data — it shipped Apr 2025
- you need open weights you can self-host or fine-tune
At a glance
The differences that matter most.
Capability indexes
Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks
Individual benchmarks
9 reported for Claude 3.5 Haiku · 23 for Qwen3 235B A22B
Claude 3.5 Haiku outperforms in 1 benchmarks (MGSM), while Qwen3 235B A22B is better at 3 benchmarks (GPQA, MATH, MMLU-Pro).
Qwen3 235B A22B shows notably better performance in the majority of benchmarks.
Human preference
Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores
Pricing Analysis
Price comparison per million tokens
For input processing, Claude 3.5 Haiku ($0.80/1M tokens) is 8.0x more expensive than Qwen3 235B A22B ($0.10/1M tokens).
For output processing, Claude 3.5 Haiku ($4.00/1M tokens) is 40.0x more expensive than Qwen3 235B A22B ($0.10/1M tokens).
In conclusion, Claude 3.5 Haiku is more expensive than Qwen3 235B A22B.*
* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens
Context Window
Maximum input and output token capacity
Claude 3.5 Haiku accepts 200,000 input tokens compared to Qwen3 235B A22B's 128,000 tokens. Claude 3.5 Haiku can generate longer responses up to 200,000 tokens, while Qwen3 235B A22B is limited to 128,000 tokens.
License
Usage and distribution terms
Claude 3.5 Haiku is licensed under a proprietary license, while Qwen3 235B A22B uses Apache 2.0.
License differences may affect how you can use these models in commercial or open-source projects.
Proprietary
Closed source
Apache 2.0
Open weights
Release Timeline
When each model was launched
Claude 3.5 Haiku was released on 2024-10-22, while Qwen3 235B A22B was released on 2025-04-29.
Qwen3 235B A22B is 6 months newer than Claude 3.5 Haiku.
Oct 22, 2024
1.9 years ago
Apr 29, 2025
1.4 years ago
6mo newerKnowledge Cutoff
When training data ends
Neither model specifies a knowledge cutoff date.
Unable to compare the recency of their training data.
Provider Availability
Claude 3.5 Haiku is available from Bedrock, Google, Anthropic. Qwen3 235B A22B is available from Fireworks, DeepInfra, Novita, Together.
Claude 3.5 Haiku
Qwen3 235B A22B
Outputs Comparison
Judge for yourself.
Run your own prompts against Claude 3.5 Haiku and Qwen3 235B A22B side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.
FAQ
Common questions about Claude 3.5 Haiku vs Qwen3 235B A22B.