Claude 3 Opus vs Qwen3.6 27B
Side-by-side benchmark comparison across coding, math, reasoning, speed, and pricing.
Qwen3.6 27B by Alibaba wins on 4 of 4 benchmarks against Claude 3 Opus by Anthropic, which leads on 0. This head-to-head comparison covers coding, math, reasoning, speed, and pricing metrics from our benchmark data.
Category-by-Category Breakdown
Reasoning: In reasoning, Qwen3.6 27B scores 80.1% on GPQA Diamond compared to Claude 3 Opus's 59.4%.
Context: In context, Qwen3.6 27B scores 262K on Context Length compared to Claude 3 Opus's 200K.
Pricing Comparison
Claude 3 Opus costs $15.0/1M input tokens and $75.0/1M output tokens, while Qwen3.6 27B costs $0.30/1M input and $2.0/1M output. Qwen3.6 27B is the more affordable option for API usage.
Verdict
Qwen3.6 27B leads across the board in affordability, making it the stronger overall choice in this comparison.
View Individual Model Pages
Claude 3 Opus vs Qwen3.6 27B — FAQ
Which is better, Claude 3 Opus or Qwen3.6 27B?
Qwen3.6 27B wins on more benchmarks overall (4 vs 0). However, the best choice depends on your specific needs — each model excels in different areas.
How does Claude 3 Opus compare to Qwen3.6 27B for coding?
SWE-bench Verified data is not available for both models. Check the detailed comparison charts above for other coding-related metrics.
Is Claude 3 Opus cheaper than Qwen3.6 27B?
Yes, Qwen3.6 27B is cheaper. Claude 3 Opus costs $15.0/1M input and $75.0/1M output tokens. Qwen3.6 27B costs $0.30/1M input and $2.0/1M output tokens.
Which is faster, Claude 3 Opus or Qwen3.6 27B?
Output speed data is not available for both models. Check the speed section of the comparison above for available performance data.
What benchmarks does the Claude 3 Opus vs Qwen3.6 27B comparison cover?
This comparison covers 4 benchmarks including GPQA Diamond, Input Cost, Output Cost, Context Length. Metrics span general intelligence, coding, math, reasoning, speed, and cost categories.