Claude Opus 4.6 vs Qwen3 Omni 30B A3B Instruct
Wins 5 of 6 areas
Coding · Reasoning · Facts · Long documents · Following instructions
Wins 0 of 6 areas
—
Claude Opus 4.6 is the stronger all-rounder.Qwen3 Omni 30B A3B Instruct is cheaper.
Scores updated · 15 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 4.63 of 3 tests
- CodingWriting and fixing software20Claude Opus 4.62 of 2 tests
- FactsGetting facts right instead of making them up20Claude Opus 4.62 of 2 tests
- Long documentsFinding answers in very long texts10Claude Opus 4.61 of 1 test
- Following instructionsDoing exactly what it is asked10Claude Opus 4.61 of 1 test
- Images and chartsUnderstanding pictures, charts and video11Even1 each
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 Omni 30B A3B Instruct costs 96% 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 4.6 pulls ahead
- Hard command-line tasks in a real terminalTerminal-Bench Hard+44.7points ahead
- Very hard expert questions across many subjectsHumanity's Last Exam+35.3points ahead
- Avoids making up answers it doesn't knowAA-Omniscience · Non-hallucination+34.8points ahead
Where Qwen3 Omni 30B A3B Instruct pulls ahead
- Reads and reasons about text in imagesOCRBenchv2+12.9points ahead
Every test, side by side
All 15 tests both models report. The winning score is in its model's colour; marks a score checked independently.
CodingClaude Opus 4.6
- Terminal-Bench HardClaude Opus 4.6 by 44.746.21.5+44.7
- SciCodeClaude Opus 4.6 by 33.351.918.6+33.3
ReasoningClaude Opus 4.6
- Humanity's Last ExamClaude Opus 4.6 by 35.339.94.6+35.3
- GPQA DiamondClaude Opus 4.6 by 27.689.662+27.6
- CritPtClaude Opus 4.6 by 12.612.60+12.6
FactsClaude Opus 4.6
- AA-Omniscience · Non-hallucinationClaude Opus 4.6 by 34.837.22.4+34.8
- AA-Omniscience · AccuracyClaude Opus 4.6 by 32.74714.3+32.7
Images and chartsEven
- MMMU-ProClaude Opus 4.6 by 19.975.455.5+19.9
- OCRBenchv2Qwen3 Omni 30B A3B Instruct by 12.948.461.3+12.9
Following instructionsClaude Opus 4.6
- IFBenchClaude Opus 4.6 by 21.953.131.2+21.9
Other results4 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 4.6 by 8313.7-69.3+83
- τ²-Bench Telecom (AA run)Claude Opus 4.6 by 75.792.116.4+75.7
- AA IntelligenceClaude Opus 4.6 by 25.931.96+25.9
- OCRBench v2 (Chinese)tie59.860tie
Questions people ask
Which is better, Claude Opus 4.6 or Qwen3 Omni 30B A3B Instruct?
Claude Opus 4.6 wins five of the six areas where both have results: coding, reasoning, facts, long documents and following instructions. Qwen3 Omni 30B A3B Instruct wins none, but costs 96% less. They are level on images and charts.
Which is better for coding?
Claude Opus 4.6. It wins 2 of the 2 coding tests both models report; Qwen3 Omni 30B A3B Instruct wins none.
Which is cheaper?
Claude Opus 4.6 costs $5.00 per million input tokens and $25.00 per million output tokens; Qwen3 Omni 30B A3B Instruct costs $0.25 and $0.97. That makes Qwen3 Omni 30B A3B Instruct about 96% cheaper for the same work.
How do you compare the two?
We use the 15 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 4 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.