Claude Haiku 4.5 vs Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B leads the LLM Stats Score 32.4 to 25.7. Qwen3.6-35B-A3B is 6.4x cheaper per token.
Anthropic · Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team · Updated for 2026
Which is better?
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B leads the overall LLM Stats Score 32.4 to 25.7, ranking #105 overall.
In the 2 individual benchmarks reported for both models, Qwen3.6-35B-A3B wins 2; this is a narrower head-to-head signal than the composite indexes.
On price, Qwen3.6-35B-A3B is roughly 6.4x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B also accepts a larger context window (262,144 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 Haiku 4.5
- you want predictable pricing at $1.00/M input and $5.00/M output
Choose Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
- overall performance matters — it scores 32.4 and ranks #105 on LLM Stats
- your work emphasizes reasoning — it leads those capability indexes
- you value its reported benchmark strengths — it wins 2 of 2 exact shared results
- cost matters — it's about 6.4x cheaper per token
- you process long inputs — it offers a 262,144 token context window
- you want the most recent training data — it shipped Apr 2026
- 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
12 reported for Claude Haiku 4.5 · 49 for Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
Claude Haiku 4.5 outperforms in 0 benchmarks, while Qwen3.6-35B-A3B is better at 2 benchmarks (GPQA, SWE-Bench Verified).
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.
Human preference
Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores
Pricing Analysis
Price comparison per million tokens
For input processing, Claude Haiku 4.5 ($1.00/1M tokens) is 10.0x more expensive than Qwen3.6-35B-A3B ($0.10/1M tokens).
For output processing, Claude Haiku 4.5 ($5.00/1M tokens) is 5.3x more expensive than Qwen3.6-35B-A3B ($0.95/1M tokens).
In conclusion, Claude Haiku 4.5 is more expensive than Qwen3.6-35B-A3B.*
* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens
Context Window
Maximum input and output token capacity
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B accepts 262,144 input tokens compared to Claude Haiku 4.5's 200,000 tokens. Qwen3.6-35B-A3B can generate longer responses up to 262,144 tokens, while Claude Haiku 4.5 is limited to 64,000 tokens.
Input capabilities
Documented input modalities across available providers
Both Claude Haiku 4.5 and Qwen3.6-35B-A3B support multimodal inputs.
They are both capable of processing various types of data, offering versatility in application.
Claude Haiku 4.5
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
License
Usage and distribution terms
Claude Haiku 4.5 is licensed under a proprietary license, while Qwen3.6-35B-A3B 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 Haiku 4.5 was released on 2025-10-15, while Qwen3.6-35B-A3B was released on 2026-04-16.
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B is 6 months newer than Claude Haiku 4.5.
Oct 15, 2025
11 months ago
Apr 16, 2026
5 months ago
6mo newerKnowledge Cutoff
When training data ends
Claude Haiku 4.5 has a documented knowledge cutoff of 2025-02-01, while Qwen3.6-35B-A3B's cutoff date is not specified.
We can confirm Claude Haiku 4.5's training data extends to 2025-02-01, but cannot make a direct comparison without Qwen3.6-35B-A3B's cutoff date.
Feb 2025
—
Provider Availability
Claude Haiku 4.5 is available from Anthropic, DeepInfra, Vertex AI. Qwen3.6-35B-A3B is available from DeepInfra.
Claude Haiku 4.5
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
Outputs Comparison
Judge for yourself.
Run your own prompts against Claude Haiku 4.5 and Qwen3.6-35B-A3B side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.
FAQ
Common questions about Claude Haiku 4.5 vs Qwen3.6-35B-A3B.