The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Claude Opus 5 vs Qwen3.8-27B

Claude Opus 5 leads the LLM Stats Score 56.2 to 46.1.

Anthropic · Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Claude Opus 5 leads the overall LLM Stats Score 56.2 to 46.1, ranking #2 overall.

In the 2 individual benchmarks reported for both models, Claude Opus 5 wins 2; 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 5

  • overall performance matters — it scores 56.2 and ranks #2 on LLM Stats
  • your work emphasizes reasoning and coding — it leads those capability indexes
  • you value its reported benchmark strengths — it wins 2 of 2 exact shared results

Choose Qwen3.8-27B

  • 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 5
Anthropic
Qwen3.8-27B
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
56.2
#2
46.1
#24
Reasoning
55.0
#3
45.6
#24
Coding
42.8
#9
34.5
#29
Agents
41.3
#3
32.9
#24
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
2 of 2
0 of 2
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

1 shared
Index
Claude Opus 5
Qwen3.8-27B
Vision
38.9#2
34.1#15
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

12 reported for Claude Opus 5 · 26 for Qwen3.8-27B

2 shared

Claude Opus 5 outperforms in 2 benchmarks (DeepSWE 1.1, Humanity's Last Exam), while Qwen3.8-27B is better at 0 benchmarks.

Claude Opus 5 significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Fri Aug 28 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 5 specifies input context (1,000,000 tokens). Only Claude Opus 5 specifies output context (128,000 tokens).

Anthropic
Claude Opus 5
Input1,000,000 tokens
Output128,000 tokens
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen3.8-27B
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
Fri Aug 28 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

Both Claude Opus 5 and Qwen3.8-27B support multimodal inputs.

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

Claude Opus 5

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Qwen3.8-27B

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Claude Opus 5 is licensed under a proprietary license, while Qwen3.8-27B uses Apache 2.0.

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

Claude Opus 5

Proprietary

Closed source

Qwen3.8-27B

Apache 2.0

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Claude Opus 5 was released on 2026-07-24, while Qwen3.8-27B was released on 2026-08-14.

Qwen3.8-27B is 1 month newer than Claude Opus 5.

Claude Opus 5

Jul 24, 2026

1 months ago

Qwen3.8-27B

Aug 14, 2026

2 weeks 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→

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against Claude Opus 5 and Qwen3.8-27B side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Claude Opus 5
✓ Preferred
Qwen3.8-27B
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Claude Opus 5 vs Qwen3.8-27B.

Which is better, Claude Opus 5 or Qwen3.8-27B?

Claude Opus 5 leads the LLM Stats Score 56.2 to 46.1. Claude Opus 5 is made by Anthropic and Qwen3.8-27B 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 compare to Qwen3.8-27B in benchmarks?

Claude Opus 5 scores BrowseComp: 90.8%, BioMysteryBench: 90.1%, OSWorld 2.0: 70.6%, DeepSWE 1.1: 68.8%, Humanity's Last Exam: 64.7%. Qwen3.8-27B scores MathVision: 94.6%, OmniDocBench 1.5: 91.1%, LiveCodeBench v6: 90.3%, CharXiv-R: 90.2%, GPQA: 89.2%.

What are the context window sizes for Claude Opus 5 and Qwen3.8-27B?

Claude Opus 5 supports 1.0M tokens and Qwen3.8-27B 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 5 and Qwen3.8-27B?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (56.2 vs 46.1), licensing (Proprietary vs Apache 2.0). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Claude Opus 5 and Qwen3.8-27B?

Claude Opus 5 is developed by Anthropic and Qwen3.8-27B is developed by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team.

Related comparisons