Claude Sonnet 4.6 vs Qwen 3.5 397B
Side-by-side benchmark comparison across coding, math, reasoning, speed, and pricing.
Claude Sonnet 4.6 by Anthropic wins on 14 of 18 benchmarks against Qwen 3.5 397B by Qwen, which leads on 4. This head-to-head comparison covers coding, math, reasoning, speed, and pricing metrics from our benchmark data.
Category-by-Category Breakdown
General Intelligence: In general intelligence, Claude Sonnet 4.6 scores 1395 on Chatbot Arena ELO compared to Qwen 3.5 397B's 1350, while Claude Sonnet 4.6 scores 84.0% on MMLU-Pro compared to Qwen 3.5 397B's 81.0%, while Claude Sonnet 4.6 scores 30.5 on AA Intelligence Index compared to Qwen 3.5 397B's 19.1.
Coding: In coding, Claude Sonnet 4.6 scores 91.0% on HumanEval+ compared to Qwen 3.5 397B's 88.0%, while Claude Sonnet 4.6 scores 79.6% on SWE-bench Verified compared to Qwen 3.5 397B's 76.4%, while Claude Sonnet 4.6 scores 65.0% on LiveCodeBench compared to Qwen 3.5 397B's 54.0%, while Claude Sonnet 4.6 scores 63 on AA Coding Index compared to Qwen 3.5 397B's 48.2.
Math: In math, Claude Sonnet 4.6 scores 88.0% on MATH compared to Qwen 3.5 397B's 87.0%, while Claude Sonnet 4.6 scores 96.0% on GSM8K compared to Qwen 3.5 397B's 95.0%.
Reasoning: In reasoning, Claude Sonnet 4.6 scores 74.1% on GPQA Diamond compared to Qwen 3.5 397B's 62.0%, while Claude Sonnet 4.6 scores 48.0% on ARC-AGI compared to Qwen 3.5 397B's 45.0%, while Claude Sonnet 4.6 scores 33.1 on AA Agentic Index compared to Qwen 3.5 397B's 10.6.
Context: In context, Claude Sonnet 4.6 scores 1.0M on Context Length compared to Qwen 3.5 397B's 262K.
Pricing Comparison
Claude Sonnet 4.6 costs $3.0/1M input tokens and $15.0/1M output tokens, while Qwen 3.5 397B costs $0.55/1M input and $3.5/1M output. Qwen 3.5 397B is the more affordable option for API usage.
Speed Comparison
Claude Sonnet 4.6 generates output at 57 tok/s compared to Qwen 3.5 397B's 45 tok/s, and the time to first token is 790 ms for Claude Sonnet 4.6 versus 600 ms for Qwen 3.5 397B. Claude Sonnet 4.6 delivers faster throughput.
Verdict
For developers prioritizing coding and general intelligence and math and speed, Claude Sonnet 4.6 has the edge. For those who value affordability, Qwen 3.5 397B is the stronger choice.
View Individual Model Pages
Claude Sonnet 4.6 vs Qwen 3.5 397B — FAQ
Which is better, Claude Sonnet 4.6 or Qwen 3.5 397B?
Claude Sonnet 4.6 wins on more benchmarks overall (14 vs 4). However, the best choice depends on your specific needs — each model excels in different areas.
How does Claude Sonnet 4.6 compare to Qwen 3.5 397B for coding?
Claude Sonnet 4.6 is better for coding, scoring 79.6% on SWE-bench Verified compared to 76.4%. SWE-bench tests real-world software engineering by resolving actual GitHub issues.
Is Claude Sonnet 4.6 cheaper than Qwen 3.5 397B?
Yes, Qwen 3.5 397B is cheaper. Claude Sonnet 4.6 costs $3.0/1M input and $15.0/1M output tokens. Qwen 3.5 397B costs $0.55/1M input and $3.5/1M output tokens.
Which is faster, Claude Sonnet 4.6 or Qwen 3.5 397B?
Claude Sonnet 4.6 is faster, generating output at 57 tok/s compared to 45 tok/s. Faster output speed means shorter wait times for API responses.
What benchmarks does the Claude Sonnet 4.6 vs Qwen 3.5 397B comparison cover?
This comparison covers 18 benchmarks including Chatbot Arena ELO, MMLU-Pro, HumanEval+, MATH, GPQA Diamond, SWE-bench Verified, Output Speed, LiveCodeBench, and more. Metrics span general intelligence, coding, math, reasoning, speed, and cost categories.