Pairwise benchmark snapshot · Aug 16, 2026
In this head-to-head showdown, Claude Opus 5 delivers higher overall intelligence and human-preferred responses (Elo 1,624 vs 1,440), while Claude Opus 5 leads in SWE-bench software engineering benchmarks (79.2%), while Qwen3 235B is more budget-friendly at $0.88/1M per 1M output tokens. Review the complete breakdown below to determine which model best fits your performance and budget requirements.
9 direct benchmark disciplines evaluated across capability, speed, and cost
Anthropic current default flagship. Official API $5/$25 per 1M tokens and a 1M context window (Anthropic, Jul 24 2026).
Open-weight Qwen3 mixture-of-experts.
Currently comparing Claude Opus 5 vs Qwen3 235B. Alternative family tiers available.
Simulate accuracy gains vs added response time & token cost
Reasoning models “think before answering” by generating internal reasoning tokens. Higher effort improves math, coding, and logic accuracy, but increases response delay and token costs.
Δ 184 Arena Elo pts
74 tok/s
$0.88 / 1M output
Relative percentile scores computed across all active models in the benchmark catalog.
Comparing top Western standard models with China's leading frontier rival across 6 skill dimensions. Tap any spoke or dot to inspect.
Category wins across reasoning intelligence, generation speed, and token cost.
Preference Elo, Coding proficiency, SWE-bench & LiveBench accuracy
Generation throughput and time to first token responsiveness
Cost per million tokens and max context window length
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5 | Qwen3 235B | Advantage Delta |
|---|---|---|---|
| Preference Elo | +184 | ||
| Coding Elo | — | — | |
| LiveBench | +11.3% | ||
| SWE-bench | +19.8% | ||
| GPQA Diamond | +10.3% | ||
| Time to first token | +10 ms | ||
| Output speed | 72 tok/s | 74 tok/s | +2 tok/s |
| Input price | $0.22/1M | +$4.78/1M | |
| Output price | $0.88/1M | +$24.12/1M | |
| Context window | +869k |
Simulate monthly production API costs in USD (US Dollar).
Qwen3 235B is estimated to save $529.10/month ($6,349/year).
Higher SWE-bench (79.2%).
Lower output list price ($0.88/1M).
Lower TTFT (310 ms).
Larger window (1M).
Claude Opus 5 is the side marked multimodal in the catalog.
| Target Workload | Recommended Pick | Evaluation Rationale |
|---|---|---|
| Repo / coding agents | Claude Opus 5 | Higher SWE-bench (79.2%). |
| High-volume chat | Qwen3 235B | Lower output list price ($0.88/1M). |
| Voice / low-latency UI | Claude Opus 5 | Lower TTFT (310 ms). |
| Long-document RAG | Claude Opus 5 | Larger window (1M). |
| Screenshots / vision | Claude Opus 5 | Claude Opus 5 is the side marked multimodal in the catalog. |
Usually Sonnet 5 vs Opus 5. Coding delta versus output $/1M. The workhorse question.
Top Anthropic vs top Google. Usually Opus 5 vs 3.6 Pro. Two different invoices.
Not a frozen 2025 article. Today that is usually Opus 5 vs GPT-5.6 Sol. Dated cells, not a brand fight.
Jul 24 2026 official API at $5/$25 and a 1M window. Preference Elo is taste, not a coding exam.
No comments posted on this matchup yet. Be the first to share an evaluation note!
Dynamic OpenGraph banner generated at /compare/claude-opus-5-vs-qwen-3-235b/opengraph-image
Verified Head-to-Head Telemetry
compare · Aug 10, 2026
Sonnet vs Opus in 2026: same family, different invoice
compare · Jul 24, 2026
Claude vs Gemini: coding, Elo, and output price — not a brand mashup
compare · Jul 24, 2026
Claude vs GPT benchmark: this hub always remaps to the current Elo leaders
launch · Jul 24, 2026
Claude Opus 5 is Anthropic’s default flagship — how to read it on CompareLLM
