Claude Opus 5.5 (Medium, Default Fallback) vs Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B
Which is better for the money: Claude Opus 5.5 (Medium, Default Fallback) by Anthropic or Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B by Alibaba? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-26.
Clear winner
Verdict
Pick Claude Opus 5.5 (Medium, Default Fallback)
Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B vs Claude Opus 5.5 (Medium, Default Fallback): 22.1% less intelligence, 61.8% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 155.9% slower end-to-end.
| Metric | Claude Opus 5.5 (Medium, Default Fallback) | Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 51.2 | 39.9 | −22.1% Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B is 22.1% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $1,626.81 | $2,632.05 | +61.8% Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B is 61.8% more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 25.34s | 64.84s | +155.9% Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B is 155.9% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $4.00 / $20.0 | $2.00 / $6.00 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text |
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Claude Opus 5.5 (Medium, Default Fallback) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Max) scores 51.80 for $1082.
- Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Claude Opus 5.5 (High, Default Fallback) scores 53.60 for $2172.
Claude Opus 5.5 (Medium, Default Fallback)Qwen3.8 2.4T A95BToday's Pareto frontierOpen-weights frontierEvery other model
Matchup
Compare something else
Agents:
Accept: text/markdown or ?format=md returns this page as Markdown. JSON: /api/v1/compare/claude-opus-5-5-medium/qwen3-8-2-4t-a95b · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/claude-opus-5-5-medium/qwen3-8-2-4t-a95b?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill