Model Comparison

Claude Opus 4.6 vs Qwen3.5-0.8B

Claude Opus 4.6 significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Want to compare interactively?Try the playground

Performance Benchmarks

Comparative analysis across standard metrics

2 benchmarks

Claude Opus 4.6 outperforms in 2 benchmarks (GPQA, MMMLU), while Qwen3.5-0.8B is better at 0 benchmarks.

Claude Opus 4.6 significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Tue May 12 2026 • llm-stats.com

Arena Performance

Human preference votes

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Only Claude Opus 4.6 specifies input context (1,000,000 tokens). Only Claude Opus 4.6 specifies output context (128,000 tokens).

Claude Opus 4.6

Input1,000,000 tokens

Output128,000 tokens

Qwen3.5-0.8B

Input- tokens

Output- tokens

Tue May 12 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input Capabilities

Supported data types and modalities

Both Claude Opus 4.6 and Qwen3.5-0.8B support multimodal inputs.

They are both capable of processing various types of data, offering versatility in application.

Claude Opus 4.6

Text

Images

Audio

Video

Qwen3.5-0.8B

Text

Images

Audio

Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Claude Opus 4.6 is licensed under a proprietary license, while Qwen3.5-0.8B 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

Qwen3.5-0.8B

Apache 2.0

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Claude Opus 4.6 was released on 2026-02-05, while Qwen3.5-0.8B was released on 2026-03-02.

Qwen3.5-0.8B is 1 month newer than Claude Opus 4.6.

Claude Opus 4.6

Feb 5, 2026

3 months ago

Qwen3.5-0.8B

Mar 2, 2026

2 months ago

3w newer

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

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion→

Key Takeaways

Claude Opus 4.6

View details

Anthropic

Larger context window (1,000,000 tokens)

Higher GPQA score (91.3% vs 11.9%)

Higher MMMLU score (91.1% vs 44.3%)

Qwen3.5-0.8B

View details

Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team

Has open weights

Detailed Comparison

AI Model Comparison Table
Feature	Claude Opus 4.6	Qwen3.5-0.8B

FAQ

Common questions about Claude Opus 4.6 vs Qwen3.5-0.8B.

Which is better, Claude Opus 4.6 or Qwen3.5-0.8B?

Claude Opus 4.6 significantly outperforms across most benchmarks. Claude Opus 4.6 is made by Anthropic and Qwen3.5-0.8B is made by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their benchmark scores, pricing, and capabilities above.

How does Claude Opus 4.6 compare to Qwen3.5-0.8B 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%. Qwen3.5-0.8B scores MMLU-Redux: 59.5%, Global PIQA: 59.4%, C-Eval: 50.5%, MMMLU: 44.3%, IFEval: 44.0%.

What are the context window sizes for Claude Opus 4.6 and Qwen3.5-0.8B?

Claude Opus 4.6 supports 1.0M tokens and Qwen3.5-0.8B supports an unknown number of 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 Qwen3.5-0.8B?

Key differences include licensing (Proprietary vs Apache 2.0). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Claude Opus 4.6 and Qwen3.5-0.8B?

Claude Opus 4.6 is developed by Anthropic and Qwen3.5-0.8B is developed by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team.