Model Comparison

Claude Opus 4.6 vs Qwen3-CoderWhich is better in 2026?

Comparing Claude Opus 4.6 and Qwen3-Coder across benchmarks, pricing, and capabilities.

Verdict: Claude Opus 4.6 vs Qwen3-Coder — which is better?

Claude Opus 4.6 (by Anthropic) and Qwen3-Coder (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.

On price, Qwen3-Coder is roughly 55.6x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.

Claude Opus 4.6 also accepts a larger context window (1,000,000 input tokens), making it the stronger choice for long documents and large codebases.

Choose Claude Opus 4.6 if…

  • you process long inputs — it offers a 1,000,000 token context window
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Feb 2026

Choose Qwen3-Coder if…

  • cost matters — it's about 55.6x cheaper per token
  • you need open weights you can self-host or fine-tune
Want to compare interactively?Try the playground

Performance Benchmarks

Comparative analysis across standard metrics

No common benchmarks found

Claude Opus 4.6 and Qwen3-Coder don't have any common benchmark datasets to compare. They may have been evaluated on different testing suites.

Arena Performance

Human preference votes

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

Qwen3-Coder costs less

For input processing, Claude Opus 4.6 ($5.00/1M tokens) is 27.8x more expensive than Qwen3-Coder ($0.18/1M tokens).

For output processing, Claude Opus 4.6 ($25.00/1M tokens) is 138.9x more expensive than Qwen3-Coder ($0.18/1M tokens).

In conclusion, Claude Opus 4.6 is more expensive than Qwen3-Coder.*

* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens

Lowest available price from all providers
Sun Jun 07 2026 • llm-stats.com
Anthropic
Claude Opus 4.6
Input tokens$5.00
Output tokens$25.00
Best providerAnthropic
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen3-Coder
Input tokens$0.18
Output tokens$0.18
Best providerDeepinfra
Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue→

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Claude Opus 4.6 accepts 1,000,000 input tokens compared to Qwen3-Coder's 256,000 tokens. Qwen3-Coder can generate longer responses up to 256,000 tokens, while Claude Opus 4.6 is limited to 128,000 tokens.

Anthropic
Claude Opus 4.6
Input1,000,000 tokens
Output128,000 tokens
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen3-Coder
Input256,000 tokens
Output256,000 tokens
Sun Jun 07 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input Capabilities

Supported data types and modalities

Claude Opus 4.6 supports multimodal inputs, whereas Qwen3-Coder does not.

Claude Opus 4.6 can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.

Claude Opus 4.6

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Qwen3-Coder

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Claude Opus 4.6 is licensed under a proprietary license, while Qwen3-Coder uses Apache 2.0.

License differences may affect how you can use these models in commercial or open-source projects.

Claude Opus 4.6

Proprietary

Closed source

Qwen3-Coder

Apache 2.0

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Claude Opus 4.6 was released on 2026-02-05, while Qwen3-Coder was released on 2025-01-01.

Claude Opus 4.6 is 13 months newer than Qwen3-Coder.

Claude Opus 4.6

Feb 5, 2026

4 months ago

1.1yr newer
Qwen3-Coder

Jan 1, 2025

1.4 years ago

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Neither model specifies a knowledge cutoff date.

Unable to compare the recency of their training data.

No cutoff dates available

Provider Availability

Claude Opus 4.6 is available from Anthropic. Qwen3-Coder is available from DeepInfra, Fireworks.

Claude Opus 4.6

anthropic logo
Anthropic
Input Price:Input: $5.00/1MOutput Price:Output: $25.00/1M

Qwen3-Coder

deepinfra logo
Deepinfra
Input Price:Input: $0.18/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.18/1M
fireworks logo
Fireworks
Input Price:Input: $0.25/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.25/1M
* Prices shown are per million tokens

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion→

Key Takeaways

Anthropic
Larger context window (1,000,000 tokens)
Supports multimodal inputs
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team

Qwen3-Coder

View details

Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team

Less expensive input tokens
Less expensive output tokens
Has open weights

Detailed Comparison

AI Model Comparison Table
Feature
Anthropic
Claude Opus 4.6
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen3-Coder

FAQ

Common questions about Claude Opus 4.6 vs Qwen3-Coder.

Which is better, Claude Opus 4.6 or Qwen3-Coder?

Claude Opus 4.6 (Anthropic) and Qwen3-Coder (Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team) each have strengths in different areas. Compare their benchmark scores, pricing, context windows, and capabilities above to determine which fits your needs.

How does Claude Opus 4.6 compare to Qwen3-Coder in benchmarks?

Claude Opus 4.6 scores Vending-Bench 2: 100.0%, AIME 2025: 99.8%, Tau2 Telecom: 99.3%, Graphwalks parents >128k: 95.4%, MRCR v2 (8-needle): 93.0%.

Is Claude Opus 4.6 cheaper than Qwen3-Coder?

Qwen3-Coder is 27.8x cheaper for input tokens. Claude Opus 4.6 costs $5.00/M input and $25.00/M output via anthropic. Qwen3-Coder costs $0.18/M input and $0.18/M output via deepinfra.

What are the context window sizes for Claude Opus 4.6 and Qwen3-Coder?

Claude Opus 4.6 supports 1.0M tokens and Qwen3-Coder supports 256K tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.

What are the main differences between Claude Opus 4.6 and Qwen3-Coder?

Key differences include context window (1.0M vs 256K), input pricing ($5.00 vs $0.18/M), multimodal support (yes vs no), licensing (Proprietary vs Apache 2.0). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Claude Opus 4.6 and Qwen3-Coder?

Claude Opus 4.6 is developed by Anthropic and Qwen3-Coder is developed by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team.

Related comparisons