The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Claude Opus 5.5 vs Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking

Claude Opus 5.5 leads the LLM Stats Score 59.7 to 18.2. Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking is 20.1x cheaper per token.

Anthropic · Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Claude Opus 5.5 leads the overall LLM Stats Score 59.7 to 18.2, ranking #1 overall.

On price, Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking is roughly 20.1x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.

Claude Opus 5.5 also accepts a larger context window (1,000,000 input tokens), making it the stronger choice for long documents and large codebases.

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

Choose Claude Opus 5.5

  • overall performance matters — it scores 59.7 and ranks #1 on LLM Stats
  • your work emphasizes reasoning and agents — it leads those capability indexes
  • you process long inputs — it offers a 1,000,000 token context window
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Sep 2026

Choose Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking

  • cost matters — it's about 20.1x cheaper per token
  • you need open weights you can self-host or fine-tune

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Claude Opus 5.5
Anthropic
Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
59.7
#1
18.2
#219
Reasoning
57.8
#1
19.5
#205
Agents
44.5
#2
7.1
#142
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
—
—
Input price
$4.00 / M
$0.20 / M
Output price
$20.00 / M
$0.99 / M
Context window
1,000,000
131,072

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

3 shared
Index
Claude Opus 5.5
Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking
Math
42.5#5
22.3#139
Vision
42.8#1
12.2#109
Multimodal
42.5#1
15.0#95
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

31 reported for Claude Opus 5.5 · 50 for Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking

No common benchmarks found

Claude Opus 5.5 and Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinkingdon't have any common benchmark datasets to compare. They may have been evaluated on different testing suites.

Human preference

Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking costs less

For input processing, Claude Opus 5.5 ($4.00/1M tokens) is 20.0x more expensive than Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking ($0.20/1M tokens).

For output processing, Claude Opus 5.5 ($20.00/1M tokens) is 20.2x more expensive than Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking ($0.99/1M tokens).

In conclusion, Claude Opus 5.5 is more expensive than Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking.*

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

Lowest available price from all providers
Tue Sep 22 2026 • llm-stats.com
Anthropic
Claude Opus 5.5
Input tokens$4.00
Output tokens$20.00
Best providerAnthropic
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking
Input tokens$0.20
Output tokens$0.99
Best providerNovita
Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue→

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Claude Opus 5.5 accepts 1,000,000 input tokens compared to Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking's 131,072 tokens. Claude Opus 5.5 can generate longer responses up to 128,000 tokens, while Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking is limited to 32,768 tokens.

Anthropic
Claude Opus 5.5
Input1,000,000 tokens
Output128,000 tokens
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking
Input131,072 tokens
Output32,768 tokens
Tue Sep 22 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

Both Claude Opus 5.5 and Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking support multimodal inputs.

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

Claude Opus 5.5

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Claude Opus 5.5 is licensed under a proprietary license, while Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking uses Apache 2.0.

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

Claude Opus 5.5

Proprietary

Closed source

Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking

Apache 2.0

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Claude Opus 5.5 was released on 2026-09-22, while Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking was released on 2025-09-22.

Claude Opus 5.5 is 12 months newer than Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking.

Claude Opus 5.5

Sep 22, 2026

0 days ago

1.0yr newer
Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking

Sep 22, 2025

1.0 years ago

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Claude Opus 5.5 has a documented knowledge cutoff of 2026-06-01, while Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking's cutoff date is not specified.

We can confirm Claude Opus 5.5's training data extends to 2026-06-01, but cannot make a direct comparison without Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking's cutoff date.

Claude Opus 5.5

Jun 2026

Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking

—

Provider Availability

Claude Opus 5.5 is available from Anthropic. Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking is available from Novita, DeepInfra.

Claude Opus 5.5

anthropic logo
Anthropic
Input Price:Input: $4.00/1MOutput Price:Output: $20.00/1M

Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking

novita logo
Novita
Input Price:Input: $0.20/1MOutput Price:Output: $1.00/1M
deepinfra logo
Deepinfra
Input Price:Input: $0.29/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.99/1M
* 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 5.5 and Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Claude Opus 5.5
✓ Preferred
Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Claude Opus 5.5 vs Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking.

Which is better, Claude Opus 5.5 or Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking?

Claude Opus 5.5 leads the LLM Stats Score 59.7 to 18.2. Claude Opus 5.5 is made by Anthropic and Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking 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 5.5 compare to Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking in benchmarks?

Claude Opus 5.5 scores BenchCAD (with Python tool): 96.2%, Global-MMLU: 94.3%, SWE-bench Multilingual: 93.9%, MILU: 93.1%, ArXivMath: 91.2%. Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking scores DocVQAtest: 95.0%, ScreenSpot: 94.7%, MMLU-Redux: 90.9%, MMBench-V1.1: 88.9%, MMLU: 87.6%.

Is Claude Opus 5.5 cheaper than Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking?

Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking is 20.0x cheaper for input tokens. Claude Opus 5.5 costs $4.00/M input and $20.00/M output via anthropic. Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking costs $0.20/M input and $0.99/M output via novita.

What are the context window sizes for Claude Opus 5.5 and Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking?

Claude Opus 5.5 supports 1.0M tokens and Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking supports 131K 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 5.5 and Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (59.7 vs 18.2), context window (1.0M vs 131K), input pricing ($4.00 vs $0.20/M), licensing (Proprietary vs Apache 2.0). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Claude Opus 5.5 and Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking?

Claude Opus 5.5 is developed by Anthropic and Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking is developed by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team.

Related comparisons