The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Claude Sonnet 5.5 vs Qwen3 Max Thinking

Claude Sonnet 5.5 leads the LLM Stats Score 58.3 to 32.8. Qwen3 Max Thinking is 1.7x cheaper per token.

Anthropic · Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Claude Sonnet 5.5 leads the overall LLM Stats Score 58.3 to 32.8, ranking #2 overall.

In the 2 individual benchmarks reported for both models, Claude Sonnet 5.5 wins 2; this is a narrower head-to-head signal than the composite indexes.

On price, Qwen3 Max Thinking is roughly 1.7x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.

Claude Sonnet 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 Sonnet 5.5

  • overall performance matters — it scores 58.3 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
  • 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 Max Thinking

  • cost matters — it's about 1.7x cheaper per token

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Claude Sonnet 5.5
Anthropic
Qwen3 Max Thinking
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
58.3
#2
32.8
#117
Reasoning
56.8
#2
33.9
#104
Coding
48.6
#2
16.2
#140
Agents
42.5
#3
9.9
#133
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
2 of 2
0 of 2
Input price
$2.00 / M
$1.20 / M
Output price
$10.00 / M
$6.00 / M
Context window
1,000,000
256,000

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

2 shared
Index
Claude Sonnet 5.5
Qwen3 Max Thinking
Math
37.6#30
31.7#67
Tool use
34.3#2
3.2#175
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

47 reported for Claude Sonnet 5.5 · 34 for Qwen3 Max Thinking

2 shared

Claude Sonnet 5.5 outperforms in 2 benchmarks (Humanity's Last Exam (no tools, text-only), SWE-bench Multilingual), while Qwen3 Max Thinking is better at 0 benchmarks.

Claude Sonnet 5.5 significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Thu Oct 08 2026 • llm-stats.com

Human preference

Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

Qwen3 Max Thinking costs less

For input processing, Claude Sonnet 5.5 ($2.00/1M tokens) is 1.7x more expensive than Qwen3 Max Thinking ($1.20/1M tokens).

For output processing, Claude Sonnet 5.5 ($10.00/1M tokens) is 1.7x more expensive than Qwen3 Max Thinking ($6.00/1M tokens).

In conclusion, Claude Sonnet 5.5 is more expensive than Qwen3 Max Thinking.*

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

Lowest available price from all providers
Thu Oct 08 2026 • llm-stats.com
Anthropic
Claude Sonnet 5.5
Input tokens$2.00
Output tokens$10.00
Best providerAnthropic
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen3 Max Thinking
Input tokens$1.20
Output tokens$6.00
Best providerDeepinfra
Notice missing or incorrect data?

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Claude Sonnet 5.5 accepts 1,000,000 input tokens compared to Qwen3 Max Thinking's 256,000 tokens. Qwen3 Max Thinking can generate longer responses up to 256,000 tokens, while Claude Sonnet 5.5 is limited to 128,000 tokens.

Anthropic
Claude Sonnet 5.5
Input1,000,000 tokens
Output128,000 tokens
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen3 Max Thinking
Input256,000 tokens
Output256,000 tokens
Thu Oct 08 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

Claude Sonnet 5.5 supports multimodal inputs, whereas Qwen3 Max Thinking does not.

Claude Sonnet 5.5 can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.

Claude Sonnet 5.5

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Qwen3 Max Thinking

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 Sonnet 5.5

Proprietary

Closed source

Qwen3 Max Thinking

Proprietary

Closed source

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Claude Sonnet 5.5 was released on 2026-09-28, while Qwen3 Max Thinking was released on 2026-02-13.

Claude Sonnet 5.5 is 8 months newer than Qwen3 Max Thinking.

Claude Sonnet 5.5

Sep 28, 2026

1 weeks ago

7mo newer
Qwen3 Max Thinking

Feb 13, 2026

7 months ago

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Claude Sonnet 5.5 has a documented knowledge cutoff of 2026-06-01, while Qwen3 Max Thinking's cutoff date is not specified.

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

Claude Sonnet 5.5

Jun 2026

Qwen3 Max Thinking

—

Provider Availability

Claude Sonnet 5.5 is available from Anthropic. Qwen3 Max Thinking is available from DeepInfra.

Claude Sonnet 5.5

anthropic logo
Anthropic
Input Price:Input: $2.00/1MOutput Price:Output: $10.00/1M

Qwen3 Max Thinking

deepinfra logo
Deepinfra
Input Price:Input: $1.20/1MOutput Price:Output: $6.00/1M
* Prices shown are per million tokens

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against Claude Sonnet 5.5 and Qwen3 Max Thinking side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Claude Sonnet 5.5
✓ Preferred
Qwen3 Max Thinking
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Claude Sonnet 5.5 vs Qwen3 Max Thinking.

Which is better, Claude Sonnet 5.5 or Qwen3 Max Thinking?

Claude Sonnet 5.5 leads the LLM Stats Score 58.3 to 32.8. Claude Sonnet 5.5 is made by Anthropic and Qwen3 Max 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 Sonnet 5.5 compare to Qwen3 Max Thinking in benchmarks?

Claude Sonnet 5.5 scores BenchCAD (with Python tool): 96.3%, ArXivMath (with tools): 95.2%, Global-MMLU: 92.1%, MILU: 91.6%, SWE-bench Multilingual: 90.3%. Qwen3 Max Thinking scores C-Eval: 93.7%, IFEval: 93.4%, AIME 2026: 93.3%, MMLU-Redux: 92.8%, GPQA: 87.4%.

Is Claude Sonnet 5.5 cheaper than Qwen3 Max Thinking?

Qwen3 Max Thinking is 1.7x cheaper for input tokens. Claude Sonnet 5.5 costs $2.00/M input and $10.00/M output via anthropic. Qwen3 Max Thinking costs $1.20/M input and $6.00/M output via deepinfra.

What are the context window sizes for Claude Sonnet 5.5 and Qwen3 Max Thinking?

Claude Sonnet 5.5 supports 1.0M tokens and Qwen3 Max Thinking supports 256K tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.

What are the main differences between Claude Sonnet 5.5 and Qwen3 Max Thinking?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (58.3 vs 32.8), context window (1.0M vs 256K), input pricing ($2.00 vs $1.20/M), multimodal support (yes vs no). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Claude Sonnet 5.5 and Qwen3 Max Thinking?

Claude Sonnet 5.5 is developed by Anthropic and Qwen3 Max Thinking is developed by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team.

Related comparisons