Model Comparison
Claude Opus 4 vs Qwen3.5-397B-A17BWhich is better in 2026?
Qwen3.5-397B-A17B shows notably better performance in the majority of benchmarks. Qwen3.5-397B-A17B is 22.2x cheaper per token.
Verdict: Claude Opus 4 vs Qwen3.5-397B-A17B — which is better?
Claude Opus 4 (by Anthropic) and Qwen3.5-397B-A17B (by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team) are two of the AI models people compare most. Here is how they stack up on benchmarks, price and capabilities, and which one to pick in 2026.
Claude Opus 4 outperforms in 1 benchmarks (MMMLU), while Qwen3.5-397B-A17B is better at 2 benchmarks (GPQA, SWE-Bench Verified). Qwen3.5-397B-A17B shows notably better performance in the majority of benchmarks.
On price, Qwen3.5-397B-A17B is roughly 22.2x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.
Qwen3.5-397B-A17B also accepts a larger context window (262,144 input tokens), making it the stronger choice for long documents and large codebases.
Choose Claude Opus 4 if…
- you want predictable pricing at $15.00/M input and $75.00/M output
Choose Qwen3.5-397B-A17B if…
- you want the strongest raw capability — it leads on 2 of 3 shared benchmarks
- cost matters — it's about 22.2x cheaper per token
- you process long inputs — it offers a 262,144 token context window
- you want the most recent training data — it shipped Feb 2026
- you need open weights you can self-host or fine-tune
Performance Benchmarks
Comparative analysis across standard metrics
Claude Opus 4 outperforms in 1 benchmarks (MMMLU), while Qwen3.5-397B-A17B is better at 2 benchmarks (GPQA, SWE-Bench Verified).
Qwen3.5-397B-A17B shows notably better performance in the majority of benchmarks.
Arena Performance
Human preference votes
Pricing Analysis
Price comparison per million tokens
For input processing, Claude Opus 4 ($15.00/1M tokens) is 25.0x more expensive than Qwen3.5-397B-A17B ($0.60/1M tokens).
For output processing, Claude Opus 4 ($75.00/1M tokens) is 20.8x more expensive than Qwen3.5-397B-A17B ($3.60/1M tokens).
In conclusion, Claude Opus 4 is more expensive than Qwen3.5-397B-A17B.*
* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens
Context Window
Maximum input and output token capacity
Qwen3.5-397B-A17B accepts 262,144 input tokens compared to Claude Opus 4's 200,000 tokens. Qwen3.5-397B-A17B can generate longer responses up to 64,000 tokens, while Claude Opus 4 is limited to 32,000 tokens.
Input Capabilities
Supported data types and modalities
Both Claude Opus 4 and Qwen3.5-397B-A17B support multimodal inputs.
They are both capable of processing various types of data, offering versatility in application.
Claude Opus 4
Qwen3.5-397B-A17B
License
Usage and distribution terms
Claude Opus 4 is licensed under a proprietary license, while Qwen3.5-397B-A17B 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 Opus 4 was released on 2025-05-22, while Qwen3.5-397B-A17B was released on 2026-02-16.
Qwen3.5-397B-A17B is 9 months newer than Claude Opus 4.
May 22, 2025
1.2 years ago
Feb 16, 2026
5 months ago
9mo 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 Opus 4 is available from Anthropic, Bedrock, Google. Qwen3.5-397B-A17B is available from Novita.
Claude Opus 4
Qwen3.5-397B-A17B
Outputs Comparison
Key Takeaways
Claude Opus 4
View detailsAnthropic
Qwen3.5-397B-A17B
View detailsAlibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Claude Opus 4
Qwen3.5-397B-A17BDetailed Comparison
Interactive Arena
Judge for yourself.
Run your own prompts against Claude Opus 4 and Qwen3.5-397B-A17B side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.
| Feature | | |
|---|
FAQ
Common questions about Claude Opus 4 vs Qwen3.5-397B-A17B.