Claude Opus 4.6 vs Qwen 3 Next 80B
Side-by-side benchmark comparison across coding, math, reasoning, speed, and pricing.
Qwen 3 Next 80B by Qwen wins on 3 of 3 benchmarks against Claude Opus 4.6 by Anthropic, which leads on 0. This head-to-head comparison covers coding, math, reasoning, speed, and pricing metrics from the AI Value Index.
Category-by-Category Breakdown
Context: In context, Qwen 3 Next 80B scores 262K on Context Length compared to Claude Opus 4.6's 200K.
Speed Comparison
Claude Opus 4.6 generates output at 68 tok/s compared to Qwen 3 Next 80B's 138 tok/s, and the time to first token is 1680 ms for Claude Opus 4.6 versus 1070 ms for Qwen 3 Next 80B. Qwen 3 Next 80B delivers faster throughput.
Verdict
Qwen 3 Next 80B leads across the board in speed, making it the stronger overall choice in this comparison.
View Individual Model Pages
Claude Opus 4.6 vs Qwen 3 Next 80B — FAQ
Which is better, Claude Opus 4.6 or Qwen 3 Next 80B?
Qwen 3 Next 80B wins on more benchmarks overall (3 vs 0). However, the best choice depends on your specific needs — each model excels in different areas.
How does Claude Opus 4.6 compare to Qwen 3 Next 80B 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 Opus 4.6 cheaper than Qwen 3 Next 80B?
Complete pricing data is not available for both models. Check the pricing section of the comparison above for available cost information.
Which is faster, Claude Opus 4.6 or Qwen 3 Next 80B?
Qwen 3 Next 80B is faster, generating output at 138 tok/s compared to 68 tok/s. Faster output speed means shorter wait times for API responses.
What benchmarks does the Claude Opus 4.6 vs Qwen 3 Next 80B comparison cover?
This comparison covers 3 benchmarks including Output Speed, Time to First Token, Context Length. Metrics span general intelligence, coding, math, reasoning, speed, and cost categories.