The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Claude Opus 5 vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next

Claude Opus 5 leads the LLM Stats Score 56.2 to 50.5.

Anthropic · Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Claude Opus 5 leads the overall LLM Stats Score 56.2 to 50.5, ranking #2 overall.

In the 3 individual benchmarks reported for both models, Claude Opus 5 wins 3; 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
  • you value its reported benchmark strengths — it wins 3 of 3 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 5
Anthropic
Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
56.2
#2
50.5
#14
Reasoning
55.0
#3
50.6
#12
Coding
42.8
#9
38.4
#19
Agents
41.3
#3
37.2
#12
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
3 of 3
0 of 3
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-Flash-Next
Vision
38.9#2
34.6#11
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

12 reported for Claude Opus 5 · 22 for Qwen3.8-Flash-Next

3 shared

Claude Opus 5 outperforms in 3 benchmarks (DeepSWE 1.1, Humanity's Last Exam, OSWorld 2.0), while Qwen3.8-Flash-Next 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-Flash-Next
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-Flash-Next 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-Flash-Next

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Claude Opus 5 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 5

Proprietary

Closed source

Qwen3.8-Flash-Next

Qwen Community License 1.0

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Claude Opus 5 was released on 2026-07-24, while Qwen3.8-Flash-Next was released on 2026-08-26.

Qwen3.8-Flash-Next is 1 month newer than Claude Opus 5.

Claude Opus 5

Jul 24, 2026

1 months ago

Qwen3.8-Flash-Next

Aug 26, 2026

2 days ago

1mo 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-Flash-Next side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Claude Opus 5
✓ Preferred
Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Claude Opus 5 vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next.

Which is better, Claude Opus 5 or Qwen3.8-Flash-Next?

Claude Opus 5 leads the LLM Stats Score 56.2 to 50.5. Claude Opus 5 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 5 compare to Qwen3.8-Flash-Next 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-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 5 and Qwen3.8-Flash-Next?

Claude Opus 5 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 5 and Qwen3.8-Flash-Next?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (56.2 vs 50.5), licensing (Proprietary vs Qwen Community License 1.0). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Claude Opus 5 and Qwen3.8-Flash-Next?

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

Related comparisons