The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Claude Opus 4.6 vs Qwen3.8 Flash

Qwen3.8 Flash leads the LLM Stats Score 49.6 to 45.3. Qwen3.8 Flash is 43.5x cheaper per token.

Anthropic · Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Qwen3.8 Flash leads the overall LLM Stats Score 49.6 to 45.3, ranking #16 overall.

In the 4 individual benchmarks reported for both models, Qwen3.8 Flash wins 3; this is a narrower head-to-head signal than the composite indexes.

On price, Qwen3.8 Flash is roughly 43.5x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.

Based on current LLM Stats indexes, shared benchmarks, pricing, and model metadata for 2026.

Choose Claude Opus 4.6

  • you want predictable pricing at $5.00/M input and $25.00/M output

Choose Qwen3.8 Flash

  • overall performance matters — it scores 49.6 and ranks #16 on LLM Stats
  • your work emphasizes agents — it leads those capability indexes
  • you value its reported benchmark strengths — it wins 3 of 4 exact shared results
  • cost matters — it's about 43.5x cheaper per token
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Aug 2026

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Claude Opus 4.6
Anthropic
Qwen3.8 Flash
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
45.3
#29
49.6
#16
Reasoning
45.7
#23
49.2
#16
Coding
33.3
#30
36.6
#20
Agents
28.1
#34
35.5
#14
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
1 of 4
3 of 4
Input price
$5.00 / M
$0.15 / M
Output price
$25.00 / M
$0.47 / M
Context window
1,000,000
1,000,000

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

4 shared
Index
Claude Opus 4.6
Qwen3.8 Flash
Math
40.1#15
32.6#55
Vision
27.2#34
34.4#13
Tool use
25.4#28
31.6#10
Multimodal
22.9#50
36.2#8
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

27 reported for Claude Opus 4.6 · 22 for Qwen3.8 Flash

4 shared

Claude Opus 4.6 outperforms in 1 benchmarks (Humanity's Last Exam), while Qwen3.8 Flash is better at 3 benchmarks (CharXiv-R, GPQA, SWE-bench Multilingual).

Qwen3.8 Flash shows notably better performance in the majority of benchmarks.

Mon Aug 31 2026 • llm-stats.com

Human preference

Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

Qwen3.8 Flash costs less

For input processing, Claude Opus 4.6 ($5.00/1M tokens) is 33.3x more expensive than Qwen3.8 Flash ($0.15/1M tokens).

For output processing, Claude Opus 4.6 ($25.00/1M tokens) is 53.2x more expensive than Qwen3.8 Flash ($0.47/1M tokens).

In conclusion, Claude Opus 4.6 is more expensive than Qwen3.8 Flash.*

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

Lowest available price from all providers
Mon Aug 31 2026 • llm-stats.com
Anthropic
Claude Opus 4.6
Input tokens$5.00
Output tokens$25.00
Best providerAnthropic
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen3.8 Flash
Input tokens$0.15
Output tokens$0.47
Best providerNovita
Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue→

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Both models have the same input context window of 1,000,000 tokens. Qwen3.8 Flash can generate longer responses up to 131,072 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
Qwen3.8 Flash
Input1,000,000 tokens
Output131,072 tokens
Mon Aug 31 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

Both Claude Opus 4.6 and Qwen3.8 Flash 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

Qwen3.8 Flash

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Both models are licensed under proprietary licenses.

Both models have usage restrictions defined by their respective organizations.

Claude Opus 4.6

Proprietary

Closed source

Qwen3.8 Flash

Proprietary

Closed source

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Claude Opus 4.6 was released on 2026-02-05, while Qwen3.8 Flash was released on 2026-08-26.

Qwen3.8 Flash is 7 months newer than Claude Opus 4.6.

Claude Opus 4.6

Feb 5, 2026

6 months ago

Qwen3.8 Flash

Aug 26, 2026

5 days ago

6mo 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

Provider Availability

Claude Opus 4.6 is available from Anthropic. Qwen3.8 Flash is available from Novita.

Claude Opus 4.6

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

Qwen3.8 Flash

novita logo
Novita
Input Price:Input: $0.15/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.47/1M
* Prices shown are per million tokens

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion→

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against Claude Opus 4.6 and Qwen3.8 Flash side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Claude Opus 4.6
✓ Preferred
Qwen3.8 Flash
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Claude Opus 4.6 vs Qwen3.8 Flash.

Which is better, Claude Opus 4.6 or Qwen3.8 Flash?

Qwen3.8 Flash leads the LLM Stats Score 49.6 to 45.3. Claude Opus 4.6 is made by Anthropic and Qwen3.8 Flash is made by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their capability indexes, individual benchmarks, pricing, and limits above.

How does Claude Opus 4.6 compare to Qwen3.8 Flash 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%, Tau2 Retail: 91.9%. Qwen3.8 Flash scores MathVision: 95.7%, LiveCodeBench v6: 91.9%, GPQA: 91.7%, CharXiv-R: 90.6%, RealWorldQA: 88.5%.

Is Claude Opus 4.6 cheaper than Qwen3.8 Flash?

Qwen3.8 Flash is 33.3x cheaper for input tokens. Claude Opus 4.6 costs $5.00/M input and $25.00/M output via anthropic. Qwen3.8 Flash costs $0.15/M input and $0.47/M output via novita.

What are the context window sizes for Claude Opus 4.6 and Qwen3.8 Flash?

Claude Opus 4.6 supports 1.0M tokens and Qwen3.8 Flash supports 1.0M 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 Qwen3.8 Flash?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (45.3 vs 49.6), input pricing ($5.00 vs $0.15/M). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Claude Opus 4.6 and Qwen3.8 Flash?

Claude Opus 4.6 is developed by Anthropic and Qwen3.8 Flash is developed by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team.

Related comparisons