The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Claude Opus 4.8 vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next

Claude Opus 4.8 and Qwen3.8-Flash-Next are closely matched at 50.8 and 49.1 on the LLM Stats Score.

Anthropic · Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Claude Opus 4.8 and Qwen3.8-Flash-Next are closely matched on the overall LLM Stats Score at 50.8 and 49.1.

In the 7 individual benchmarks reported for both models, Claude Opus 4.8 wins 5; this is a narrower head-to-head signal than the composite indexes.

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

Choose Claude Opus 4.8

  • you value its reported benchmark strengths — it wins 5 of 7 exact shared results

Choose Qwen3.8-Flash-Next

  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Aug 2026
  • you need open weights you can self-host or fine-tune

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Claude Opus 4.8
Anthropic
Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
50.8
#15
49.1
#20
Reasoning
50.3
#13
48.9
#19
Coding
41.6
#11
36.1
#23
Agents
35.3
#19
35.1
#20
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
5 of 7
2 of 7
Input price
$5.00 / M
— / M
Output price
$25.00 / M
— / M
Context window
1,000,000
—

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

4 shared
Index
Claude Opus 4.8
Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
Math
39.3#20
32.7#56
Vision
36.4#7
34.1#14
Tool use
30.4#17
31.1#11
Multimodal
36.1#8
36.1#9
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

27 reported for Claude Opus 4.8 · 22 for Qwen3.8-Flash-Next

7 shared

Claude Opus 4.8 outperforms in 5 benchmarks (DeepSWE 1.1, GPQA, Humanity's Last Exam, SWE-bench Multilingual, SWE-Bench Pro), while Qwen3.8-Flash-Next is better at 2 benchmarks (CharXiv-R, Toolathlon).

Claude Opus 4.8 shows notably better performance in the majority of benchmarks.

Thu Sep 17 2026 • llm-stats.com

Human preference

Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Only Claude Opus 4.8 specifies input context (1,000,000 tokens). Only Claude Opus 4.8 specifies output context (128,000 tokens).

Anthropic
Claude Opus 4.8
Input1,000,000 tokens
Output128,000 tokens
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
Thu Sep 17 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

Both Claude Opus 4.8 and Qwen3.8-Flash-Next support multimodal inputs.

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

Claude Opus 4.8

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Qwen3.8-Flash-Next

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Claude Opus 4.8 is licensed under a proprietary license, while Qwen3.8-Flash-Next uses Qwen Community License 1.0.

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

Claude Opus 4.8

Proprietary

Closed source

Qwen3.8-Flash-Next

Qwen Community License 1.0

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Claude Opus 4.8 was released on 2026-05-28, while Qwen3.8-Flash-Next was released on 2026-08-26.

Qwen3.8-Flash-Next is 3 months newer than Claude Opus 4.8.

Claude Opus 4.8

May 28, 2026

3 months ago

Qwen3.8-Flash-Next

Aug 26, 2026

3 weeks ago

3mo 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→

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against Claude Opus 4.8 and Qwen3.8-Flash-Next side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Claude Opus 4.8
✓ Preferred
Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Claude Opus 4.8 vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next.

Which is better, Claude Opus 4.8 or Qwen3.8-Flash-Next?

Claude Opus 4.8 and Qwen3.8-Flash-Next are closely matched on the LLM Stats Score at 50.8 and 49.1. Claude Opus 4.8 is made by Anthropic and Qwen3.8-Flash-Next 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 4.8 compare to Qwen3.8-Flash-Next in benchmarks?

Claude Opus 4.8 scores GPQA: 93.6%, DeepSearchQA: 93.1%, CharXiv-R: 89.9%, SWE-Bench Verified: 88.6%, ScreenSpot Pro: 87.9%. Qwen3.8-Flash-Next scores MathVision: 95.7%, LiveCodeBench v6: 91.9%, GPQA: 91.7%, CharXiv-R: 90.6%, RealWorldQA: 88.5%.

What are the context window sizes for Claude Opus 4.8 and Qwen3.8-Flash-Next?

Claude Opus 4.8 supports 1.0M tokens and Qwen3.8-Flash-Next 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 4.8 and Qwen3.8-Flash-Next?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (50.8 vs 49.1), licensing (Proprietary vs Qwen Community License 1.0). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Claude Opus 4.8 and Qwen3.8-Flash-Next?

Claude Opus 4.8 is developed by Anthropic and Qwen3.8-Flash-Next is developed by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team.

Related comparisons