ZMIME
Comparison · 2 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

Qwen3.6 Max Preview vs Claude Opus 4.1

Qwen3.6 Max Preview comes out ahead, 54 to 49 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.

  1. Our pick

    Alibaba (Qwen)

    Qwen3.6 Max Preview

    Released Apr 20, 2026

    54/100
    • ECI149.2
    • Price$1.30 / $7.80
    • Context262K
    Full specs Remove Qwen3.6 Max Preview

  2. Anthropic

    Claude Opus 4.1

    Released Aug 5, 2025

    49/100
    • ECI144.1
    • Price$15.00 / $75.00
    • Context200K
    Full specs Remove Claude Opus 4.1

  3. Add a model

    Make it a three-way comparison.

01 — Verdict

Qwen3.6 Max Preview is our pick

Qwen3.6 Max Preview is the better all-round choice, scoring 54/100 against Claude Opus 4.1 (49). It leads on capability, price and context window. Claude Opus 4.1 wins on inputs & features. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

  • CapabilityQwen3.6 Max PreviewCapabilities Index (ECI): Qwen3.6 Max Preview 149.2 · Claude Opus 4.1 144.1
  • Lowest priceQwen3.6 Max PreviewQwen3.6 Max Preview $2.92 · Claude Opus 4.1 $30.00 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextQwen3.6 Max PreviewQwen3.6 Max Preview 262,144 · Claude Opus 4.1 200,000 tokens
  • Widest inputsClaude Opus 4.1Qwen3.6 Max Preview: Text · Claude Opus 4.1: Text, Images, PDFs
  • Self-hostingNo open weightsBoth are available only through APIs
How the score is built
MeasureWeightQwen3.6 Max PreviewClaude Opus 4.1
CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI)50%7771
Price25%280
Inputs & features15%3570
Context window10%3732
Overall100%54/10049/100
02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.

Qwen3.6 Max Preview vs Claude Opus 4.1 specifications side by side
SpecificationQwen3.6 Max PreviewAlibaba (Qwen)Claude Opus 4.1Anthropic
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)149.2 (best)144.1
ECI rank#54 of 148 (best)#81 of 148
GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions87.4% (best)77.3%
FrontierMath Tiers 1–3Research-level mathematics—12.6%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics91.1% (best)68.9%
SWE-bench VerifiedFixing real GitHub issues76.7% (best)73.4%
SimpleQA VerifiedShort factual questions52.0%—
Price per million tokens
Input$1.30 (best)$15.00
Output$7.80 (best)$75.00
Cached input$0.13—
Blended (3:1)$2.92 (best)$30.00
Long-context rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceOfficial Alibaba APIMedian of 14 providers
Limits
Context window262,144 tokens (best)200,000 tokens
Max output65,536 tokens (best)32,000 tokens
Inputs and features
TextYesYes
ImagesNoYes
PDFsNoYes
AudioNoNo
VideoNoNo
ReasoningYesYes
Tool callingYesYes
Structured outputNoNo
Availability
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
API model IDqwen3.6-max-preview—
API providers1014 (best)
ReleasedApr 20, 2026Aug 5, 2025
Knowledge cutoffApr 2025Mar 31, 2025
03 — Cost

What would a month cost?

Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.

  • Qwen3.6 Max Preview$28.60
  • Claude Opus 4.1$300.00
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Qwen3.6 Max Preview or Claude Opus 4.1?

Qwen3.6 Max Preview is the better all-round choice, scoring 54/100 against Claude Opus 4.1 (49). It leads on capability, price and context window. Claude Opus 4.1 wins on inputs & features. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

Which is cheaper, Qwen3.6 Max Preview or Claude Opus 4.1?

Qwen3.6 Max Preview is cheaper at $1.30 input / $7.80 output per million tokens (official Alibaba API price). Claude Opus 4.1 costs $15.00 input / $75.00 output per million tokens (median across 14 API providers). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $2.92 per million tokens for Qwen3.6 Max Preview versus $30.00 for Claude Opus 4.1 (10× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

Qwen3.6 Max Preview scores higher on the Capabilities Index (ECI): Qwen3.6 Max Preview 149.2 (#54 of 148) and Claude Opus 4.1 144.1 (#81 of 148). Their confidence ranges do not overlap (147.6–152.0 vs 141.6–146.0), so the gap is a real one. On individual benchmarks: GPQA Diamond — Qwen3.6 Max Preview 87.4%, Claude Opus 4.1 77.3%; OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025 — Qwen3.6 Max Preview 91.1%, Claude Opus 4.1 68.9%; SWE-bench Verified — Qwen3.6 Max Preview 76.7%, Claude Opus 4.1 73.4%.

Which is better for coding?

Qwen3.6 Max Preview resolves more real GitHub issues on SWE-bench Verified: Qwen3.6 Max Preview 76.7% and Claude Opus 4.1 73.4%. Both support tool calling for agent workflows.

Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen3.6 Max Preview has the largest context window at 262,144 tokens, against 200,000 for Claude Opus 4.1. Maximum output per response: Qwen3.6 Max Preview up to 65,536, Claude Opus 4.1 up to 32,000 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Qwen3.6 Max Preview accepts text; Claude Opus 4.1 accepts text, images and PDFs. Claude Opus 4.1 handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

No. Qwen3.6 Max Preview and Claude Opus 4.1 are proprietary and only available through APIs and apps.

Which is newer?

Qwen3.6 Max Preview is the newest, released Apr 20, 2026. Claude Opus 4.1 came out Aug 5, 2025. Knowledge cutoff: Qwen3.6 Max Preview Apr 2025, Claude Opus 4.1 Mar 31, 2025.

How do you decide the winner?

Each model gets a 0–100 score on capability (50%, independent benchmark results); price (25%, blended price per million tokens (3 input : 1 output), log scale); inputs & features (15%, image, PDF, audio and video input, tool calling, structured output and reasoning); context window (10%, maximum tokens per request, log scale). Dimensions missing for any model are dropped and the remaining weights rescaled, so every model is judged on the same evidence. Specs and prices come from public model listings and the labs’ own API pages; capability scores come from independent benchmark runs. Data updated Oct 4, 2026.

05 — Keep comparing

Related comparisons