Claude Opus 4.7 vs Qwen3.6 35B A3B
Wins 6 of 8 areas
Coding · Agents · Reasoning · Facts · Math · Long documents
Wins 1 of 8 areas
Following instructions
Claude Opus 4.7 is the stronger all-rounder.Qwen3.6 35B A3B is cheaper and better at following instructions.
Scores updated · 34 tests both models report · How we compare
Where each one wins
Tests won in each of the eight areas we test. Each piece is one test, so a longer bar means more evidence; grey means the two scored within a point of each other.
- CodingWriting and fixing software60Claude Opus 4.76 of 6 tests
- AgentsCarrying out multi-step tasks on its own40Claude Opus 4.74 of 4 tests
- ReasoningHard problems that need careful thinking30Claude Opus 4.73 of 3 tests
- MathCompetition and research-level math30Claude Opus 4.73 of 3 tests
- FactsGetting facts right instead of making them up20Claude Opus 4.72 of 2 tests
- Long documentsFinding answers in very long texts10Claude Opus 4.71 of 1 test
- Following instructionsDoing exactly what it is asked01Qwen3.6 35B A3B1 of 1 test
- Images and chartsUnderstanding pictures, charts and video22Even2 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.
Qwen3.6 35B A3B costs 91% less for the same work.
The biggest differences
The three tests each model wins by the widest margin. Scores are out of 100.
Where Claude Opus 4.7 pulls ahead
- Unpublished advanced math problemsFrontierMath Tiers 1-3 (v2)+49.8points ahead
- Command-line tasks in a real terminalTerminal-Bench 2.1+38.2points ahead
- Finds hard-to-locate facts by browsing the webBrowseComp+30.6points ahead
Where Qwen3.6 35B A3B pulls ahead
- Reads and reasons about text in imagesOCRBenchv2+8.6points ahead
- Follows unfamiliar, precisely checkable instructionsIFBench+5.8points ahead
- Math problems shown in pictures and chartsMathVista+2points ahead
Every test, side by side
All 34 tests both models report. The winning score is in its model's colour; marks a score checked independently.
CodingClaude Opus 4.7
- Terminal-Bench 2.1Claude Opus 4.7 by 38.283.144.9+38.2
- SciCodeClaude Opus 4.7 by 17.954.536.6+17.9
- Terminal-Bench HardClaude Opus 4.7 by 16.751.534.8+16.7
- SWE-bench ProClaude Opus 4.7 by 14.864.349.5+14.8
- SWE-bench VerifiedClaude Opus 4.7 by 14.287.673.4+14.2
- SWE-bench MultilingualClaude Opus 4.7 by 13.380.567.2+13.3
AgentsClaude Opus 4.7
- BrowseCompClaude Opus 4.7 by 30.679.348.7+30.6
- τ-Bench V3 · BankingClaude Opus 4.7 by 25.334.69.3+25.3
- GDPValClaude Opus 4.7 by 2342.819.8+23
- MCP AtlasClaude Opus 4.7 by 14.577.362.8+14.5
ReasoningClaude Opus 4.7
- Humanity's Last ExamClaude Opus 4.7 by 20.142.322.2+20.1
- CritPtClaude Opus 4.7 by 11.7120.3+11.7
- GPQA DiamondClaude Opus 4.7 by 7.391.484.1+7.3
FactsClaude Opus 4.7
- AA-Omniscience · AccuracyClaude Opus 4.7 by 30.148.918.8+30.1
- AA-Omniscience · Non-hallucinationClaude Opus 4.7 by 8.257.749.5+8.2
Images and chartsEven
- CharXiv (RQ)Claude Opus 4.7 by 139178+13
- OCRBenchv2Qwen3.6 35B A3B by 8.656.965.5+8.6
- MMMU-ProClaude Opus 4.7 by 3.878.875+3.8
- MathVistaQwen3.6 35B A3B by 284.486.4+2
MathClaude Opus 4.7
- FrontierMath Tiers 1-3 (v2)Claude Opus 4.7 by 49.870.220.4+49.8
- HMMT Feb. 2026Claude Opus 4.7 by 10.393.983.6+10.3
- AIME 2026Claude Opus 4.7 by 3.195.892.7+3.1
Following instructionsQwen3.6 35B A3B
- IFBenchQwen3.6 35B A3B by 5.858.664.4+5.8
Other results10 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 4.7 by 49.527.3-22.2+49.5
- ToolathlonClaude Opus 4.7 by 32.459.326.9+32.4
- Artificial Analysis Coding IndexClaude Opus 4.7 by 31.773.641.9+31.7
- AA Agentic IndexClaude Opus 4.7 by 24.539.515+24.5
- AA IntelligenceClaude Opus 4.7 by 22.540.718.2+22.5
- Terminal-Bench 2.0Claude Opus 4.7 by 17.969.451.5+17.9
- RealWorldQAQwen3.6 35B A3B by 9.775.685.3+9.7
- EmbSpatial-BenchQwen3.6 35B A3B by 7.177.284.3+7.1
- τ²-Bench Telecom (AA run)Qwen3.6 35B A3B by 6.788.695.3+6.7
- SimpleVQAQwen3.6 35B A3B by 2.456.558.9+2.4
Questions people ask
Which is better, Claude Opus 4.7 or Qwen3.6 35B A3B?
Claude Opus 4.7 wins six of the eight areas we test: coding, agents, reasoning, facts, math and long documents. Qwen3.6 35B A3B wins following instructions, and costs 91% less. They are level on images and charts.
Which is better for coding?
Claude Opus 4.7. It wins 6 of the 6 coding tests both models report; Qwen3.6 35B A3B wins none.
Which is cheaper?
Claude Opus 4.7 costs $5.00 per million input tokens and $25.00 per million output tokens; Qwen3.6 35B A3B costs $0.38 and $2.25. That makes Qwen3.6 35B A3B about 91% cheaper for the same work.
How do you compare the two?
We use the 34 benchmark tests both models have published scores on. The verdict counts the 24 tests in the eight capability areas, and a gap under one point (ten on rating-style scales) counts as a tie. The other 10 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.