Claude 3.5 Haiku vs Qwen3.5 Omni Flash
Wins 1 of 7 areas
Following instructions
Wins 4 of 7 areas
Agents · Reasoning · Images and charts · Long documents
Qwen3.5 Omni Flash wins more areas, narrowly.Claude 3.5 Haiku is better at following instructions.
Scores updated · 16 tests both models report · How we compare
Where each one wins
Tests won in each of the seven areas where both have results. Each piece is one test, so a longer bar means more evidence; grey means the two scored within a point of each other.
- ReasoningHard problems that need careful thinking02Qwen3.5 Omni Flash2 of 3 tests · 1 tie
- AgentsCarrying out multi-step tasks on its own01Qwen3.5 Omni Flash1 of 1 test
- Images and chartsUnderstanding pictures, charts and video01Qwen3.5 Omni Flash1 of 1 test
- Long documentsFinding answers in very long texts01Qwen3.5 Omni Flash1 of 1 test
- Following instructionsDoing exactly what it is asked10Claude 3.5 Haiku1 of 1 test
- CodingWriting and fixing software11Even1 each
- FactsGetting facts right instead of making them up11Even1 each
Agents, images and charts, long documents and following instructions rest on a single test each.
What it costs
Prices per million tokens, roughly 750,000 words. The bars show the cost of a million tokens read plus a million written.
The biggest differences
The three tests each model wins by the widest margin. Scores are out of 100.
Where Qwen3.5 Omni Flash pulls ahead
- Graduate-level biology, physics and chemistry questionsGPQA Diamond+33.4points ahead
- Reasons across sets of long documentsAA-LCR+24.7points ahead
- Harder college exam questions with imagesMMMU-Pro+19.1points ahead
Where Claude 3.5 Haiku pulls ahead
- Avoids making up answers it doesn't knowAA-Omniscience · Non-hallucination+52.3points ahead
- Follows unfamiliar, precisely checkable instructionsIFBench+4.8points ahead
- Code for real scientific research problemsSciCode+1.9points ahead
Every test, side by side
All 16 tests both models report. The winning score is in its model's colour; marks a score checked independently.
CodingEven
- Terminal-Bench HardQwen3.5 Omni Flash by 62.38.3+6
- SciCodeClaude 3.5 Haiku by 1.927.425.5+1.9
ReasoningQwen3.5 Omni Flash
- GPQA DiamondQwen3.5 Omni Flash by 33.440.874.2+33.4
- Humanity's Last ExamQwen3.5 Omni Flash by 43.67.6+4
- CritPttie00tie
FactsEven
- AA-Omniscience · Non-hallucinationClaude 3.5 Haiku by 52.358.96.6+52.3
- AA-Omniscience · AccuracyQwen3.5 Omni Flash by 1.513.214.7+1.5
Images and chartsQwen3.5 Omni Flash
- MMMU-ProQwen3.5 Omni Flash by 19.145.664.7+19.1
Long documentsQwen3.5 Omni Flash
- AA-LCRQwen3.5 Omni Flash by 24.727.352+24.7
Following instructionsClaude 3.5 Haiku
- IFBenchClaude 3.5 Haiku by 4.842.838+4.8
Other results5 tests, not counted
Tests outside the eight areas. They are not counted above: several are summary scores built from other tests, or the same test under another name.
- τ²-Bench Telecom (AA run)Qwen3.5 Omni Flash by 59.924.684.5+59.9
- AA-OmniscienceClaude 3.5 Haiku by 42.6-22.5-65.1+42.6
- AA Agentic IndexQwen3.5 Omni Flash by 39.71.941.6+39.7
- AA IntelligenceQwen3.5 Omni Flash by 3.68.912.5+3.6
- Artificial Analysis Coding IndexClaude 3.5 Haiku by 1.915.914+1.9
Questions people ask
Which is better, Claude 3.5 Haiku or Qwen3.5 Omni Flash?
Qwen3.5 Omni Flash wins four of the seven areas where both have results: agents, reasoning, images and charts and long documents. Claude 3.5 Haiku wins following instructions. They are level on coding and facts.
Which is better for coding?
Neither. They win 1 coding test each of the 2 both models report.
How do you compare the two?
We use the 16 benchmark tests both models have published scores on. The verdict counts the 11 tests in the eight capability areas, and a gap under one point (ten on rating-style scales) counts as a tie. The other 5 are listed but not counted, because several are summary scores or repeat a test. Each score is the one shown on the model's own page.