Claude Opus 4.8 vs Qwen3.5 27B
Wins 6 of 8 areas
Coding · Agents · Reasoning · Facts · Images and charts · Math
Wins 1 of 8 areas
Following instructions
Claude Opus 4.8 is the stronger all-rounder.Qwen3.5 27B 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 4.86 of 6 tests
- AgentsCarrying out multi-step tasks on its own40Claude Opus 4.84 of 4 tests
- ReasoningHard problems that need careful thinking30Claude Opus 4.83 of 3 tests
- MathCompetition and research-level math30Claude Opus 4.83 of 3 tests
- FactsGetting facts right instead of making them up20Claude Opus 4.82 of 2 tests
- Images and chartsUnderstanding pictures, charts and video20Claude Opus 4.82 of 2 tests
- Following instructionsDoing exactly what it is asked01Qwen3.5 27B1 of 1 test
- Long documentsFinding answers in very long texts00Even0 each · 1 tie
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.
Qwen3.5 27B costs 91% 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 4.8 pulls ahead
- Avoids making up answers it doesn't knowAA-Omniscience · Non-hallucination+42.2points ahead
- Answers hard knowledge questions correctlyAA-Omniscience · Accuracy+28.1points ahead
- Completes tasks by operating a computer desktopOSWorld-Verified+27.2points ahead
Where Qwen3.5 27B pulls ahead
- Follows unfamiliar, precisely checkable instructionsIFBench+13.4points 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 4.8
- Terminal-Bench HardClaude Opus 4.8 by 25.758.332.6+25.7
- LMArena · WebDevClaude Opus 4.8 by 199 rating points15561357+199 rating
- SWE-bench ProClaude Opus 4.8 by 1869.251.2+18
- SWE-bench VerifiedClaude Opus 4.8 by 16.288.672.4+16.2
- SWE-bench MultilingualClaude Opus 4.8 by 15.184.469.3+15.1
- SciCodeClaude Opus 4.8 by 14.954.439.5+14.9
AgentsClaude Opus 4.8
- OSWorld-VerifiedClaude Opus 4.8 by 27.283.456.2+27.2
- BrowseCompClaude Opus 4.8 by 23.384.361+23.3
- GDPValClaude Opus 4.8 by 14.847.833+14.8
- MCP AtlasClaude Opus 4.8 by 13.882.268.4+13.8
ReasoningClaude Opus 4.8
- Humanity's Last ExamClaude Opus 4.8 by 24.848.723.9+24.8
- CritPtClaude Opus 4.8 by 2020.90.9+20
- GPQA DiamondClaude Opus 4.8 by 6.29285.8+6.2
FactsClaude Opus 4.8
- AA-Omniscience · Non-hallucinationClaude Opus 4.8 by 42.260.718.5+42.2
- AA-Omniscience · AccuracyClaude Opus 4.8 by 28.148.820.7+28.1
Images and chartsClaude Opus 4.8
- CharXiv (RQ)Claude Opus 4.8 by 10.489.979.5+10.4
- LMArena · VisionClaude Opus 4.8 by 55 rating points12951240+55 rating
MathClaude Opus 4.8
- HMMT Feb. 2026Claude Opus 4.8 by 14.495.581.1+14.4
- AIME 2026Claude Opus 4.8 by 8.310091.7+8.3
- IMOAnswerBenchClaude Opus 4.8 by 3.683.579.9+3.6
Following instructionsQwen3.5 27B
- IFBenchQwen3.5 27B by 13.462.275.6+13.4
Other results12 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 4.8 by 72.828.8-44+72.8
- NL2RepoClaude Opus 4.8 by 42.469.727.3+42.4
- Artificial Analysis Coding IndexClaude Opus 4.8 by 39.474.334.9+39.4
- Terminal-Bench 2.0Claude Opus 4.8 by 3374.641.6+33
- Tool-DecathlonClaude Opus 4.8 by 28.459.931.5+28.4
- AA IntelligenceClaude Opus 4.8 by 18.941.822.9+18.9
- ScreenSpot-Pro (No tools)Claude Opus 4.8 by 17.687.970.3+17.6
- AA Agentic IndexQwen3.5 27B by 1242.654.6+12
- WideSearchClaude Opus 4.8 by 11.872.961.1+11.8
- HMMT Nov. 2025Claude Opus 4.8 by 6.796.589.8+6.7
- IncludeClaude Opus 4.8 by 687.681.6+6
- τ²-Bench Telecom (AA run)tie94.493.9tie
Questions people ask
Which is better, Claude Opus 4.8 or Qwen3.5 27B?
Claude Opus 4.8 wins six of the eight areas we test: coding, agents, reasoning, facts, images and charts and math. Qwen3.5 27B wins following instructions, and costs 91% less. They are level on long documents.
Which is better for coding?
Claude Opus 4.8. It wins 6 of the 6 coding tests both models report; Qwen3.5 27B wins none.
Which is cheaper?
Claude Opus 4.8 costs $5.00 per million input tokens and $25.00 per million output tokens; Qwen3.5 27B costs $0.30 and $2.40. That makes Qwen3.5 27B 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 22 tests in the eight capability areas, and a gap under one point (ten on rating-style scales) counts as a tie. The other 12 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.