Qwen3.6 Max Preview vs Claude Opus 4.5
Too close to call on our weighted score (Claude Opus 4.5 55, Qwen3.6 Max Preview 54). The right pick depends on what you value most.
Alibaba (Qwen)Qwen3.6 Max Preview
54/100- ECI149.2
- Price$1.30 / $7.80
- Context262K
AnthropicClaude Opus 4.5
55/100- ECI150.1
- Price$5.00 / $25.00
- Context200K
Add a model
Make it a three-way comparison.
Too close to call
It is close. Our weighted score puts them within a point (Claude Opus 4.5 55/100, Qwen3.6 Max Preview 54/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: Claude Opus 4.5 for raw capability, Qwen3.6 Max Preview on price and Qwen3.6 Max Preview for long inputs. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.
- CapabilityClaude Opus 4.5Capabilities Index (ECI): Claude Opus 4.5 150.1 · Qwen3.6 Max Preview 149.2
- Lowest priceQwen3.6 Max PreviewQwen3.6 Max Preview $2.92 · Claude Opus 4.5 $10.00 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextQwen3.6 Max PreviewQwen3.6 Max Preview 262,144 · Claude Opus 4.5 200,000 tokens
- Widest inputsClaude Opus 4.5Qwen3.6 Max Preview: Text · Claude Opus 4.5: Text, Images, PDFs
- Self-hostingNo open weightsBoth are available only through APIs
| Measure | Weight | Qwen3.6 Max Preview | Claude Opus 4.5 |
|---|---|---|---|
| CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI) | 50% | 77 | 78 |
| Price | 25% | 28 | 2 |
| Inputs & features | 15% | 35 | 80 |
| Context window | 10% | 37 | 32 |
| Overall | 100% | 54/100 | 55/100 |
Every spec in one table
Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.
| Specification | Qwen3.6 Max PreviewAlibaba (Qwen) | Claude Opus 4.5Anthropic |
|---|---|---|
| Capability | ||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | 149.2 | 150.1 (best) |
| ECI rank | #54 of 148 | #48 of 148 (best) |
| GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions | 87.4% (best) | 86.1% |
| FrontierMath Tiers 1–3Research-level mathematics | — | 34.4% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics | 91.1% (best) | 86.1% |
| SWE-bench VerifiedFixing real GitHub issues | 76.7% | 76.7% |
| SimpleQA VerifiedShort factual questions | 52.0% (best) | 45.7% |
| Price per million tokens | ||
| Input | $1.30 (best) | $5.00 |
| Output | $7.80 (best) | $25.00 |
| Cached input | $0.13 (best) | $0.50 |
| Blended (3:1) | $2.92 (best) | $10.00 |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Official Alibaba API | Official Anthropic API |
| Limits | ||
| Context window | 262,144 tokens (best) | 200,000 tokens |
| Max output | 65,536 tokens (best) | 64,000 tokens |
| Inputs and features | ||
| Text | Yes | Yes |
| Images | No | Yes |
| PDFs | No | Yes |
| Audio | No | No |
| Video | No | No |
| Reasoning | Yes | Yeslow · medium · high |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | No | Yes |
| Availability | ||
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| API model ID | qwen3.6-max-preview | claude-opus-4-5 |
| API providers | 10 | 28 (best) |
| Released | Apr 20, 2026 | Nov 24, 2025 |
| Knowledge cutoff | Apr 2025 | May 2025 |
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 4.5$100.00
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Qwen3.6 Max Preview or Claude Opus 4.5?
It is close. Our weighted score puts them within a point (Claude Opus 4.5 55/100, Qwen3.6 Max Preview 54/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: Claude Opus 4.5 for raw capability, Qwen3.6 Max Preview on price and Qwen3.6 Max Preview for long inputs. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.
Which is cheaper, Qwen3.6 Max Preview or Claude Opus 4.5?
Qwen3.6 Max Preview is cheaper at $1.30 input / $7.80 output per million tokens (official Alibaba API price). Claude Opus 4.5 costs $5.00 input / $25.00 output per million tokens (official Anthropic API price). 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 $10.00 for Claude Opus 4.5 (3.4× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
Claude Opus 4.5 scores higher on the Capabilities Index (ECI): Claude Opus 4.5 150.1 (#48 of 148) and Qwen3.6 Max Preview 149.2 (#54 of 148). The confidence ranges of the top two overlap (147.9–153.0 vs 147.6–152.0), so treat the gap as small. On individual benchmarks: GPQA Diamond — Qwen3.6 Max Preview 87.4%, Claude Opus 4.5 86.1%; OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025 — Qwen3.6 Max Preview 91.1%, Claude Opus 4.5 86.1%; SWE-bench Verified — Qwen3.6 Max Preview 76.7%, Claude Opus 4.5 76.7%; SimpleQA Verified — Qwen3.6 Max Preview 52.0%, Claude Opus 4.5 45.7%.
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 4.5 76.7%. 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 4.5. Maximum output per response: Qwen3.6 Max Preview up to 65,536, Claude Opus 4.5 up to 64,000 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Qwen3.6 Max Preview accepts text; Claude Opus 4.5 accepts text, images and PDFs. Claude Opus 4.5 handles the widest range of inputs.
Are any of these open source?
No. Qwen3.6 Max Preview and Claude Opus 4.5 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 4.5 came out Nov 24, 2025. Knowledge cutoff: Qwen3.6 Max Preview Apr 2025, Claude Opus 4.5 May 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.
Related comparisons
- Add GLM-5.1Three-way comparison
- Qwen3.6 Max Preview vs GLM-5.1Z.ai (Zhipu) · ECI 149.9
- Qwen3.6 Max Preview vs Grok 4.3xAI · ECI 149.2
- Qwen3.6 Max Preview vs GPT-5.4 miniOpenAI · ECI 148.8
- Qwen3.6 Max Preview vs Kimi K2.7 CodeMoonshot AI · ECI 150.0
- Claude Opus 4.5 vs GPT-5.1OpenAI · ECI 149.7
- Claude Opus 4.5 vs Gemini 3 Pro PreviewGoogle · ECI 153.0
