Model Comparison
Claude Opus 4.6 vs Qwen3.5-122B-A10BWhich is better in 2026?
Claude Opus 4.6 significantly outperforms across most benchmarks. Qwen3.5-122B-A10B is 9.1x cheaper per token.
Verdict: Claude Opus 4.6 vs Qwen3.5-122B-A10B — which is better?
Claude Opus 4.6 (by Anthropic) and Qwen3.5-122B-A10B (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 4.6 outperforms in 8 benchmarks (BrowseComp, CharXiv-R, GPQA, Humanity's Last Exam, MMMLU, MMMU-Pro, SWE-Bench Verified, Terminal-Bench 2.0), while Qwen3.5-122B-A10B is better at 0 benchmarks. Claude Opus 4.6 significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.
On price, Qwen3.5-122B-A10B is roughly 9.1x 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 want the strongest raw capability — it leads on 8 of 8 shared benchmarks
- you process long inputs — it offers a 1,000,000 token context window
Choose Qwen3.5-122B-A10B if…
- cost matters — it's about 9.1x cheaper per token
- 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 4.6 outperforms in 8 benchmarks (BrowseComp, CharXiv-R, GPQA, Humanity's Last Exam, MMMLU, MMMU-Pro, SWE-Bench Verified, Terminal-Bench 2.0), while Qwen3.5-122B-A10B is better at 0 benchmarks.
Claude Opus 4.6 significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.
Arena Performance
Human preference votes
Pricing Analysis
Price comparison per million tokens
For input processing, Claude Opus 4.6 ($5.00/1M tokens) is 12.5x more expensive than Qwen3.5-122B-A10B ($0.40/1M tokens).
For output processing, Claude Opus 4.6 ($25.00/1M tokens) is 7.8x more expensive than Qwen3.5-122B-A10B ($3.20/1M tokens).
In conclusion, Claude Opus 4.6 is more expensive than Qwen3.5-122B-A10B.*
* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens
Context Window
Maximum input and output token capacity
Claude Opus 4.6 accepts 1,000,000 input tokens compared to Qwen3.5-122B-A10B's 262,144 tokens. Claude Opus 4.6 can generate longer responses up to 128,000 tokens, while Qwen3.5-122B-A10B is limited to 64,000 tokens.
Input Capabilities
Supported data types and modalities
Both Claude Opus 4.6 and Qwen3.5-122B-A10B support multimodal inputs.
They are both capable of processing various types of data, offering versatility in application.
Claude Opus 4.6
Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
License
Usage and distribution terms
Claude Opus 4.6 is licensed under a proprietary license, while Qwen3.5-122B-A10B 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 4.6 was released on 2026-02-05, while Qwen3.5-122B-A10B was released on 2026-02-24.
Qwen3.5-122B-A10B is 1 month newer than Claude Opus 4.6.
Feb 5, 2026
4 months ago
Feb 24, 2026
3 months ago
2w 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 4.6 is available from Anthropic. Qwen3.5-122B-A10B is available from Novita.
Claude Opus 4.6
Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
Outputs Comparison
Key Takeaways
Claude Opus 4.6
View detailsAnthropic
Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
View detailsAlibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Detailed Comparison
| Feature | | |
|---|
FAQ
Common questions about Claude Opus 4.6 vs Qwen3.5-122B-A10B.