Claude Opus 4.5 vs Qwen3 30B A3B
Wins 6 of 6 areas
Coding · Agents · Reasoning · Facts · Long documents · Following instructions
Wins 0 of 6 areas
—
Claude Opus 4.5 is the stronger all-rounder.Qwen3 30B A3B is cheaper.
Scores updated · 19 tests both models report · How we compare
Where each one wins
Tests won in each of the six 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 thinking30Claude Opus 4.53 of 3 tests
- CodingWriting and fixing software20Claude Opus 4.52 of 2 tests
- FactsGetting facts right instead of making them up20Claude Opus 4.52 of 2 tests
- AgentsCarrying out multi-step tasks on its own10Claude Opus 4.51 of 1 test
- Long documentsFinding answers in very long texts10Claude Opus 4.51 of 1 test
- Following instructionsDoing exactly what it is asked10Claude Opus 4.51 of 1 test
Agents, 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.
Qwen3 30B A3B costs 97% less for the same work.
The biggest differences
The tests each model wins by the widest margin, up to three each. Scores are out of 100.
Where Claude Opus 4.5 pulls ahead
- Hard command-line tasks in a real terminalTerminal-Bench Hard+44.7points ahead
- Answers hard knowledge questions correctlyAA-Omniscience · Accuracy+30.4points ahead
- Graduate-level biology, physics and chemistry questionsGPQA Diamond+25points ahead
Where Qwen3 30B A3B pulls ahead
No clear win on a test scored out of 100.
Every test, side by side
All 19 tests both models report. The winning score is in its model's colour; marks a score checked independently.
CodingClaude Opus 4.5
- Terminal-Bench HardClaude Opus 4.5 by 44.7472.3+44.7
- SciCodeClaude Opus 4.5 by 2149.528.5+21
ReasoningClaude Opus 4.5
- GPQA DiamondClaude Opus 4.5 by 2586.661.6+25
- Humanity's Last ExamClaude Opus 4.5 by 23.930.16.2+23.9
- CritPtClaude Opus 4.5 by 4.64.60+4.6
FactsClaude Opus 4.5
- AA-Omniscience · AccuracyClaude Opus 4.5 by 30.446.616.2+30.4
- AA-Omniscience · Non-hallucinationClaude Opus 4.5 by 19.73919.3+19.7
Following instructionsClaude Opus 4.5
- IFBenchClaude Opus 4.5 by 16.55841.5+16.5
Other results9 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.
- AA-OmniscienceClaude Opus 4.5 by 65.514-51.5+65.5
- τ²-Bench Telecom (AA run)Claude Opus 4.5 by 63.589.526+63.5
- AA Agentic IndexClaude Opus 4.5 by 52.259.67.4+52.2
- HMMT Feb. 2025Claude Opus 4.5 by 42.192.950.8+42.1
- Artificial Analysis Coding IndexClaude Opus 4.5 by 34.547.813.3+34.5
- LiveCodeBenchClaude Opus 4.5 by 24.48762.6+24.4
- AIME 2025Claude Opus 4.5 by 21.992.870.9+21.9
- AA IntelligenceClaude Opus 4.5 by 21.529.17.6+21.5
- LiveBenchClaude Opus 4.5 by 1.77674.3+1.7
Questions people ask
Which is better, Claude Opus 4.5 or Qwen3 30B A3B?
Claude Opus 4.5 wins all six areas where both have results: coding, agents, reasoning, facts, long documents and following instructions. Qwen3 30B A3B wins none, but costs 97% less.
Which is better for coding?
Claude Opus 4.5. It wins 2 of the 2 coding tests both models report; Qwen3 30B A3B wins none.
Which is cheaper?
Claude Opus 4.5 costs $5.00 per million input tokens and $25.00 per million output tokens; Qwen3 30B A3B costs $0.20 and $0.80. That makes Qwen3 30B A3B about 97% cheaper for the same work.
How do you compare the two?
We use the 19 benchmark tests both models have published scores on. The verdict counts the 10 tests in the eight capability areas, and a gap under one point (ten on rating-style scales) counts as a tie. The other 9 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.